Movie Downloads Get Even More Confusing Thanks To Sony
from the this-is-not-a-step-forward dept
The New York Times is talking up a new experiment that Sony is running with the movie Hancock. Before the movie is even available for rental, owners of a specific Sony television with a special "internet package" (only $299) will be able to download the movie for a fee (as if the $299 weren't already enough). The New York Times piece seems to go out of its way to make Sony look like it's made some huge breakthrough with this offering, in part because it brings together the content side of the business with the consumer electronics side -- two groups that not only rarely spoke, but were often at odds with each other on certain projects. On that part, perhaps it is a step forward -- but for the overall market, this seems like a big step backwards.Requiring a specific brand of TV just to watch a movie over the internet seems hugely problematic. And, when you combine that with Apple, Netflix, Blockbuster and others all working on their own proprietary solutions for downloading movies to watch on your television, the entire market is splintering. By now, you would think the industry would recognize that proprietary solutions that only play on a particular piece of hardware tend not to be a very good solution, and actually scare off buyers who don't want to get stuck having bet on the wrong horse. But, apparently, someone forgot to tell all of these guys working on their own proprietary movie download solutions.
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
Filed Under: movie downloads, proprietary solutions
Companies: sony
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Wow, what a deal
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is one of those schemes that sounds good on paper in a boardroom but won't work in real life. Sony are trying to leverage their movie division to help sell its electronics division's products. They've correctly identified a common problem and a possible incentive to piracy (some people can't/won't go to theatres, but will still want to watch the movie while the hype's at its peak). However, a $299 device using a proprietary format that you can't copy, especially given Sony's DRM track record, won't attract anyone.
If only the movie industry would learn from the mistakes that the music industry have made over the last decade - they're parts of the same corporations, FFS. Music sales have struggled because of confusing DRM, high prices and inflexibility. What the movie industry needs is a common format unencumbered with unnecessary restrictions - you know, like the AVIs people can already download from P2P.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Oops. You're right! Fixed. Thanks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hey - that's my dumb idea !
Law suit in 3 .. 2 .. 1
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
???
Almost makes going to the cinema look like a good deal!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Devices capable of streaming
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hardware hack
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hardware hack
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Counterpoint: iTunes/iPod is a locked, proprietary system that works.
The thing is, every big company wants to think they can pull it off as well as Apple did, so they go for it. But they can't, usually, make it work. And this is Sony, late of BetaMax, Minidisc, MemoryStick, and BluRay - they just love making up pointless new ways to store or transfer data.
It would take an incredible act of humility, from a global corporate giant, to admit that their in-house solution isn't as good (read that as easy to use, popular, stylish, and/or profitable) as Apple's. That, and using anyone else's proprietary solution means giving up a big chunk of the money. And since the only proven non-proprietary system for downloading large video files is Bit Torrent, which Sony would never touch, they don't have too many other options.
It doesn't help that I've never wanted the Internet on my TV. It's just not something that hit me as an obvious shortcoming of the device, even if Hancock does look like a decent movie.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It is a different case, definitely, and much less destined for failure than Sony's TV thing, but the point I was making is that "proprietary solutions that only play on a particular piece of hardware" can work in the marketplace without scaring off users. It just requires them to be well-executed, which this Sony thing doesn't appear to be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Yea. Tottaly HAVE to go through Apple's iTunes...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Unless Ephpod and Songbird allow you to buy things from the iTunes store, my point stands - you still have to go through iTunes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Are you saying that your complaint is that in order to sell on the iTunes store you need to sell on the iTunes store?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
iTunes is no different from Sony's idea here, except that Apple pulled it off in a way that wasn't terrible. That's the point I'm getting at.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
It's always been quite easy to get your content into iTunes or an iPod. What the iTunes store enables is the purchasing of digital content online. Apple products are quite useful and usable even if you never do that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's ok
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I've never wanted TV on my computer, either. Convergence ("Look! Internet on my TV! Look! TV on my Internet!") is just a dream/scheme hyped by the hardware vendors and content providers, so the hardware vendors can lock you into their proprietary solution, while the content providers get to determine how, if and when you get to view their product. I say, thanks, but no thanks. I'll take my plain old TV and my commodity computer and I'll determine how, if or when I engage the hardware and/or the content.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
To be comparable, this Sony TV would have to be a generic upnp client.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I know what yopu're saying with this, but it's not exactly true. The iPod/iTunes combo works fine - if you own an iPod and a Windows/OSX system. At the moment, that happens to be the majority of people buying digital music, and it's an easy enough solution that the plebs out there don't bother looking for a better solution.
However, things are changing. More and more people are coming across the restrictions of the iTunes DRM - leading other stores to be able to offer DRM-free music that work with iTunes and offering competition for the first time since iTunes opened. In addition, while iTunes has certainly been successful, its rise has not been enough to replace the fall in CD sales. CDs, of course, being a format that anyone can play anywhere, regardless of which CD player they happen to own.
As someone who spent last Christmas explaining to my parents why their newly purchased HP photo printer wouldn't accept their Sony camera's memory stick, I really wish Sony would stop this crap before it's too late. I don't think I have to hold my breath before this one fails though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Then I stop and think - wow, it's reasons JUST like this and hiding DRM on CD's is EXACTLY WHY I got a Mitsubishi 65" over a Sony~
Sorry, don't want 'DRM' or other nefarious devices, firmware, and the like running in my TV too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why the hate...?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why the hate...?
"Trying to find a business model" isn't an acceptable excuse when the models they try are harming their consumers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Typical Sony Shenanigans
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The problem, as it has been pointed out, is when sony hides rootkits on cds without alerting the customer that they are actually introducing vulnerabilities onto their computer when they listen to the cd. but that really has nothing to do with this issue...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's See...
Proprietary? Check.
Locked Down with DRM? Check.
Sony appears to have another winner on it's hands! Will they ever learn? All signs point to NO.
Could you imagine how many people would buy this tv if they simply included network connectivity? I do not understand what is so hard to understand about the concept of allowing the consumer to have a choice in how they use media.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
and i think you mean hancock?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://thepiratebay.org/browse/202
Done.
...or, be a turd and give Sony 300 more dollars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
AppleTV
As such, it's just one software update away from supporting any "standard" that might down the pike, just like iPods also support mp3s and AACs and mpegs. In fact, it just recently got the ability to do "rentals" in just that fashion, with the AppleTV 2.0 software update.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: AppleTV
However, since the early successes of Blockbuster, Hollywood has always been very interested in trying to get into the rental/Pay per use model. However, if hollywood leveraged some of the technologies that have come to pass in the past 5 years, it would render the PPV model obsolete. By lowering manufacturing, distribution, and advertising costs to nil, it may make more sense to consider selling the content digitally for less, absent of a PPV/Rental model. So what does the production company get for a video sale anyway? $1.25? $5.00?
First, in order to have a "good" PPV model, you need to standardize to gain critical mass. Multiple technologies only confuse consumers, and the already non-compatible technologies will create FUD in the consumer mindset.
But this has it's own challenges- the idea of standardization levels the playing field from a technology perspective. Is there an "Open" DRM technology? (That seems paradoxical.)
Also the potential of monthly bandwidth caps or Net neutrality makes a PPV model less applicable. PPV has the potential to download the same content over and over again, increasing network utilization exponentially and has the potential to push backbone bandwidth past the breaking point. It would be best to just download the content once.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: AppleTV
To my mind, that's actually the biggest problem with the industry. They not only ignored VHS but actively fought it until they were forced to accept it. Then, they found that they could leverage the rental/sales model to make massive profits.
There's a sea change in the industry once again. They should accept it and use it to their advantage, not fight an unwinnable battle yet again.
As for DRM, I really don't think that most people have a major problem with a DRM system for rentals and temporary downloads. The major problems here are threefold: they are pricing the rentals too high, they are forcing insanely inflexible DRM on purchases and restricting the downloads to a single, overpriced, piece of hardware.
Meanwhile, pirates get a pre-release DVD rip of the movie out there for free. That's the problem. Attack the demand for pirated movies, on the customer's terms, and it will cease to be an issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Owned by Sony
With all the nasty crap they've pulled w/DRM in music CDs, USB drives, DVD players, and computer games, why on EARTH does anyone continue to trust them at all?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Big Media WANTS fragmentation
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
all things are proprietary1
HDMI interface...started out sony prop..now mainstream..must have worked, huh?
The freaking Sony Walkman was proprietary and well merchandised by sony before becoming mainstream as a "personal cassette player".
ALL THINGS ARE PROPRIETARY INITIALLY!
If there was no innovation, there would be no advancement. Many individuals and companies have both succeeded and failed at many attempts to mainstream their ideas. that is capitalism. That is progress. If you dont think it is a good idea, dont participate and if the massess agree, it will go the way of the HDDVD.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]