Blu-ray Working Great, For Pirates

from the unintended-consequences dept

Tue, Nov 18th 2008 7:52am — Carlo Longino

Blu-ray "won" the next-generation DVD standards battle, but that victory has, thus far, been pretty hollow, as consumers haven't wholeheartedly embraced the new format (and the new DVD players they need to take advantage of it). But one group of people is loving Blu-ray: Asian movie pirates. The pirates rip Blu-ray movies, then burn them onto DVDs using the AVCHD format, at a resolution that's lower than Blu-ray, but still higher than standard DVDs. The lower resolution means the pirates can burn onto regular blank DVDs, not blank Blu-ray discs, holding their costs down and creating fat profit margins on the $7 bootlegs. Wasn't one of the reasons the movie industry was so hot on Blu-ray its fantastic DRM that was supposed to make life hell for pirates? All it appears to have really done is annoy customers, while Blu-ray itself is making the pirates' business even better.

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: blu-ray, drm

87 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Ima Fish, 18 Nov 2008 @ 8:14am

"All it appears to have really done is annoy customers..."

Think about the contempt Sony has for its legitimate customers. The way overpriced proprietary memory stick for the PSP. The lack of MP3 support in Sony's initial portable music players. Root-kits. The constantly changing DRM associated with Blu-ray. To name a few.

Has anyone considered the fact that maybe Sony is being run by pirates? Every decision it makes seems more designed to help pirates and hurt legitimate customers. It's just something to think about.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Potato Head, 18 Nov 2008 @ 8:37am

Puh-leeeze
Who cares.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
David, 18 Nov 2008 @ 8:38am

It is classic
There is a philosophy that says by focusing on what we don't want, we create it. This is what Sony (and many of the other vendors who concentrate their business models on fighting something like piracy) is doing. They are making sure that the only people who benefit are the ones they don't want to.

I used to be a big fan of Sony, back in the '80s, their quality in electronics gave you a reason to buy. They have lost that drive to satisfy the customer, and are only looking to protect themselves.

Sony is not even on my radar anymore as a place I would turn to for electronics. I'd rather give it to an up and comer, who wants to make something I want to use.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 8:40am

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Since my experience with SECUROM, I do not do any business with a companies that treats its customers as criminals and INFECTS their computers with that virus called SECUROM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SecuROM

"The use of SecuROM is highly controversial because certain aspects of the protection are similar to functions of malware, and users are not always informed when SecuROM is included with a product.[1] A class action suit has been filed against Electronic Arts for this very issue."

SERVES THEM RIGHT! Long live the DVD!

Not 1 cent to Sony!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 8:42am

Re: Puh-leeeze
I do. BDRips are beautiful. I have to RE-DL all my movies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 8:43am

http://www.shishak.net/wall-eDVDvsBR/wall-eDVDvsBR.png
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 8:45am

Re:
they're consistently eroding privacy right. its good for business if they know everything you're doing, especially if they can sue you for it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
EVIL_BASTARD, 18 Nov 2008 @ 8:47am

Re:
I think you are on to something here Capt. Fish. Sony = pirates.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
UNANNOYED, 18 Nov 2008 @ 8:58am

I haven't even noticed DRM on the PS3
I have a PS3 and I haven't ran into ANY problems with DRM at all ,EVER. I wonder who are these annoyed customers? Probably the ones that are trying to RIP the content for friends.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 9:03am

Didn't someone claim the Blu-Ray DRM would take at least 10 years to crack? ROFLMAO.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 9:05am

Re: I haven't even noticed DRM on the PS3
DRM is used on PC games - When you install a game with SECUROM it installs a ROOT-kit VIRUS they call DRM that infects your PC and causes tons of trouble and instability with your PC.

http://www.oneworldsims.com/the-sas/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=61& Itemid=81
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 9:05am

keep on cracking
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lying, 18 Nov 2008 @ 9:09am

The little known fact is that BluRay DRM was created back in 1997, so it did take 10 years to crack... Nine years unreleased, one year to break.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Potato Head, 18 Nov 2008 @ 9:12am

More like
Smoking crack!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Freedom, 18 Nov 2008 @ 9:24am

Convenience is the name of the game..
When you can download a higher quality version (when compared to iTunes Downloads, etc.) of almost every latest BR (or DVD for that matter) worth owning with no DRM (i.e. restrictions) for free with at least at this point little to no hassle then WHY would someone pay for a movie if they have a hi-speed Internet connection?

Sure there is the ethics of it, but from a convenience stand-point, why?

What they need to do is solve the convenience problem and make their distribution easier, priced right, and allow the end-user to copy as wanted to portable devices, etc. without ANY hassle. You'll still have pirates, but it will keep honest folks honest.

What I don't understand at all is why someone would pay $30 or more for a BR movie. To me that idea that a movie is worth $30 is nuts with the market size today. Despite the higher production costs, to me a movie is less valuable then music. I might listen to music over and over again but I rarely watch a movie more than once - sure there are exceptions, but in general once is all. For that I pay $30 for a restricted piece of media and a player that needs to be linked back to home base for constant firmware updates - yippie! I can't even make a copy to play on a portable media player for my kids when traveling if I buy a legit BR disc with spending even more to hack, etc. Heck, for that sort of premium I should have preloaded non-DRM'd copies for portable players on the disc itself ready to be copied - more options, not less.

Give me an unrestricted download for under $5 and an unrestricted BR disc for under $10 and I'm there and so probably are a bunch of other folks including those that pirate. After you have a good system in place for legit purchases then fit to make the pirate route harder and less convenient then yours.

Freedom
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 9:35am

Re: It is classic
same here back in the 80s i was sonny or bust now its more like anything but Sony.

every time some1 i know complain about some Sony product they git i reply "serves you right to ask for my advice and go the opposite way"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chronno S. Trigger, 18 Nov 2008 @ 9:43am

Re: I haven't even noticed DRM on the PS3
You keep your PS3 up to date? Unplug it from your network and don't update it for about a year and no new disks will play. Now think of the people who have stand alone players and don't know they have to update their firmware manually regularly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 9:43am

Is 720p considered hi-def?
Now these guys are selling discs marked "Blu-ray" (usually $30)
but are actually DVDs for $7. They will still play on Blu-ray
players but not on DVD players.

These AVCHD bootleg discs provide 720p instead of the full 1080p.
As mentioned, this is still a step up from 480i from regular DVDs.

Would the customer notice the that they are not getting the full
Hi-Def from these bootleg discs? Would $7 be too much compared
to a DVD bootleg? Or would 720p be "good enough"?

Knowing Sony et.al., we might see a future firmware update that
disable the AVCHD playback feature for all customers.

If people still wants to get a full 1080p, and not get burnt on a 720p
disc, we may end up with pirates getting a reputation of providing a
product of known quality.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 9:55am

Re: Is 720p considered hi-def?
720p is high definition, and really, for most people, the 480 res offered by DVD is enough, so of course 720 is enough. Add in the fact that the price differential for the legit 1080 is more than 300% and the pirates look like clear winners.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 10:00am

Re: I haven't even noticed DRM on the PS3
UNANNOYED: You are grossly ignorant.

The PS3 is the only BluRay player that will "always" work. Sony "updates" BluRay and the 500+ dollar BluRay player you bought for your PC won't work with the new version, so you have to rebuy. The PS3 has an Internet connection and gets updated by Sony to work with the new BluRay update.

Also, its a damn game console. Most people are used to the fact that the game from a N64 won't run on a GameCube. That kind of built in DRM/propriatariness is somewhat acceptable. The real problem is with *EVERY* BluRay player that is NOT the PS3 in regards to movies.

Seriously, how pissed would you be if you sprung a few hundred dollars for a DVD player and then they come out with DVD2 and your player won't read them and you have to spring for a few hundred more just to watch new releases?

That's exactly what the issue with BluRay is in regards to DRM. Aside from the higher price tag...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 10:05am

If you don't want your stuff pirated
If you don't want people to see your stuff, don't release it. Or come to terms with the fact that throwing non-physical(aka digital) stuff around will result in some people 'copying' it while the majority of people will purchase it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Big Mook (profile), 18 Nov 2008 @ 10:28am

Sour Grapes, much?
All the whiners keep saying that DVD is just fine, and who needs BR anyway? It's too expensive, it requires a special player, it's encrypted, bitch, moan, piss, cry...

Those are the same people who have tiny, little 42" and smaller TVs, where BR and upconverted DVD look virtually the same, especially 10 feet away on your couch.

Well, they don't look the same on my 65" HDTV. Yes, upconverted DVD looks OK, but BR is perfect. There is a huge difference and only the legally blind (or stupid) can't see it.

Now maybe I'm some kind of special case, in that I like to watch movies and sports in full HD and actually take advantage of a superior experience. Maybe I'm special because I enjoy a crystal-clear picture and enhanced digital audio. Then again, I don't think I'm a special case at all. I just decided not to listen to all the idiots who said it was too hard, too expensive, has too much DRM, and assorted other nonsense.

DRM is a non-issue. If I really want a movie to own, I'll buy it. $20-$30 isn't really too much to pay for the BR experience on a huge TV, when you know you're going to watch that movie dozens of times. What, you don't think you'll watch it over and over again? Pro-tip: Don't buy it, rent it instead. Like anyone, I would like BR to be cheaper, and in time it will be, but I'm not going to bitch and moan about it. IT IS THE BEST HOME VIEWING OPTION AVAILABLE FOR MOVIE LOVERS, PERIOD! Unless you have the misfortune to have purchased an HDTV that's too small to tell the difference, that is.

And now more and more new BR titles are coming out with the digital copy option, so you have the BR disc for home viewing on your big screen, and a digital copy that will play from your PC or personal player.

For the record, my TV, BR player and home theater system combined cost under $2500, which is probably less than many of the whiners paid for their much smaller HDTV by itself if they went with LCD or plasma.

Just please stop crying, crybabies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jason@tinyComb.com, 18 Nov 2008 @ 10:33am

Chinese-Blu-Rays Have Been Around Since July
One thing to note, the fake Blu-Ray disks can be played in a Blu-Ray player and according to friends in China, the Blu-Ray fakes have been around since July. The going price for a fake Blu-Ray disc is around $1.25 compared to a standard DVD price of $0.80. No $7 margins. Maybe Pre-bargain rates.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 10:54am

Re: Convenience is the name of the game..
What I don't understand at all is why someone would pay $30 or more for a BR movie. To me that idea that a movie is worth $30 is nuts with the market size today. Despite the higher production costs, to me a movie is less valuable then music.

Bingo, I totally agree. 99% of all movies and TV I watch is discarded and never watched again. I'm just lucky enough to hvae a 24Mbit unlimited, uncapped, unthrottled connection and a sweet ass newsgroup subscription ;-)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yakko Warner, 18 Nov 2008 @ 11:00am

Re: Sour Grapes, much?
Compensating for something?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Alex H., 18 Nov 2008 @ 11:10am

Bluray: for movie geeks only
"Well, they don't look the same on my 65" HDTV."

You heard it from the expert here. If you have a 65" HDTV and your life revolves around movies, then get a Blu-ray. Otherwise don't bother. That seems like reasonable advice.

Just out of curiosity Big Mook, if you didn't go "with LCD or plasma", what did you go with?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Urban, 18 Nov 2008 @ 11:20am

Re: Re: It is classic
How dare they go against your advice!

Oh, and FYI
"the British call a contemptible person a `git'"
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/git
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chris (profile), 18 Nov 2008 @ 11:20am

is that what a pirate is?
selling copies of physical media is piracy?

wow, all this time i thought a pirate was anyone who wanted to use media on their terms rather than the rights holder's.

if pirate sells other people's for profit, i guess i disagree with piracy.

if that's piracy, what do you call someone who just doesn't want to be bothered with incompatible formats, DRM, and commercials?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Big Mook (profile), 18 Nov 2008 @ 11:22am

Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
Toshiba DLP rear-projection. My life doesn't revolve around movies and sports, but I'd rather have a near-perfect experience than just OK. Does that really make me so strange?

My family now looks forward to movie night, and the NCAA tourney, Super Bowl, etc. make for much better get-togethers.

If this makes me some sort of two-headed freak, then so be it.

I'm just tired of the complaints from losers who want any old excuse to pirate content.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yakko Warner, 18 Nov 2008 @ 11:22am

Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
That's one big CRT... ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Alex H., 18 Nov 2008 @ 11:38am

Re: Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
"Toshiba DLP rear-projection."

Ah, thanks, I looked it up and learned something today, thank you.

"My life doesn't revolve around movies and sports, but I'd rather have a near-perfect experience than just OK. Does that really make me so strange?"

Sorry, I was being a little unfair, I apologize. You just have different priorities, but I don't think most people would get their money's worth out of your system, I know I wouldn't.

"I'm just tired of the complaints from losers who want any old excuse to pirate content."

I think there are separate issues here. A lot of people feel that their DVDs are good enough and Bluray down't give them enough added benefit to switch, that is one crowd. Another group hates DRM that stops them from doing what they want with stuff that they have legally bought, and the attitude behind that that made Sony think it is alright to install malware on people's computers to protect their content. A third group just wants free stuff. There is overlap between the groups, but they are not the same.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 12:00pm

Re: Sour Grapes, much?
You have a 65" TV? And you watch the same movies dozens of times? You need to get out more -- unless maybe your head is too big to fit through the door.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 12:01pm

Re: Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
Just because other people differ with your self-righteous opinion does not make them losers. However, calling them losers probably makes you one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Big Mook (profile), 18 Nov 2008 @ 12:14pm

Re: Re: Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
Thanks for the follow-up. It's not everyday on TechDirt that someone avoids flamebait mode in favor of real communication.

"I don't think most people would get their money's worth out of your system, I know I wouldn't."

That speaks well to what kind of system people are using to view the content. If someone is OK with watching their 27" CRT or worse yet, their PC monitor, then DVD or even VHS is sufficient.

I'm comparing the experience to that of the traditional theater, where one can easily lay down $100-$150 for a family movie night (family of 4). At home, the cost is negligible, and while an 80ft. screen and theater sound is definitely better, my home system is excellent and a much better value for the money.

While I agree with your last paragraph for the most part, I still believe the loudest complainers just want something for free, illegally if need be. It is not worth my time or my dime to be able to watch a movie or TV show on a phone, iPod, PSP or any other knick-knack that can't compete with my home theater. And if I'm going to watch it on the home theater, then I want it to look great, not just OK.

@Yakko Warner: Yes, I'm compensating for something. I'm one of the only people evidently who actually pays for what I want and realizes that it's my money and no one is holding a gun to my head to make me spend it. Don't want DRM, don't buy it. But don't steal it, either. Therein lies the problem, eh?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 12:18pm

Re: Sour Grapes, much?
42" is tiny now? O.o
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 12:20pm

Re: Sour Grapes, much?
DRM is a real issue if you plan to watch a movie a dozen times or more. Or less, depending. for BluRay, you need special hardware and cabling, and Sony's constantly changing the firmware spec. given a suitable amount of time, how much do you want to bet that your movies (or your whole $2500 setup) will be inoperable?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Big Mook (profile), 18 Nov 2008 @ 12:35pm

Re: Re: Sour Grapes, much?
I think you must be unaware that every BR player made in the last couple of years also has an ethernet connection and the ability to upgrade firmware whenever necessary. Now, it's still possible that Samsung will stop supporting the unit I have, and I'll have to live with that if it happens, but it's still not going to sour me on the whole idea of Blu-Ray.

I didn't realize that an ethernet cable and an internet connection were considered "special hardware and cabling".

I have no worries about my setup, except for the cost of the replacement lamps for the DLP TV when they burn out.

BTW: 42" is perfect for the normal single-wide trailer, but for my triple wide, I need the 65". The 42" goes on the outhouse door so I can watch Jerry Springer while I'm "visiting the library".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 12:46pm

How does one upgrade a BR when one does not have an internet connection because one lives in the sticks where internet does not exist? Well it does, but it's dialup, and 28.8 at that (on a good day).

Excuse my ignorance and lack of googling.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Big Mook (profile), 18 Nov 2008 @ 12:53pm

Re:
Surely you have Internet at work or somewhere? Hit the nearest McDonald's or Starbucks that has WiFi??

When all else fails, you can get it from the manufacturer on a disc that you load into the player.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 12:55pm

Re:
I heard net-rumors it was cracked within six months of release, but I'll give you points on the technicality.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 1:07pm

Re: Re:
So you can dl the firmware itself, burn it to a disk and then load it? The BR doesn't need to be connected to an internet connection? (I'm comparing this to what I have to go through to update my tivo guide schedule, and heaven forbid their is a service update, it takes like six hours)because then that's totally workable.

McDonald's is 20 miles away, and though I'm not positive, I'd say they don't offer wifi, as they spent a lot of money making the drive-thru accessible via tractor.

I have a dlp also, no cable, and one hell of a netflix subscription.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Big Mook (profile), 18 Nov 2008 @ 1:19pm

Re: Re: Re:
The player need never be connected to the 'net, as long as you can get the firmware on a disc in another way. It's just much easier for someone with broadband to download straight to the player.

Where do you live? My small community has 3 McD's within a 3 mile radius. Didn't know there was anywhere in the civilized world without McD's.

Whoa: Make that 4 in a 3 mile radius. Forgot about the one in Wal-Mart.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 1:31pm

I actually thought Big Mook was being seriously with his completely insane posts... until I clicked his name to see what link he put in.
Almost had me going there...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 1:35pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Correction, 16.1 miles away, according to Mcd's website. Some other one in Oxford Ohio but that's ultra far away, regardless of what McDonald's says.

But hey that's awesome thanks for the info, time to update the netflix queue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ProphetBeal, 18 Nov 2008 @ 2:04pm

Re:
You forgot to point out that AVCHD IS A format that Sony created and has been pushing on the market...Perhaps they are behind the "pirates"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Big Mook (profile), 18 Nov 2008 @ 2:26pm

Re:
So you're saying you hate Blu-Ray, love piracy, and you believe you can exorcise the souls of dead space-aliens from yourself using $cientology and Dianetics?

I have an e-meter you might be interested in...

By the way, although The Cruiser is a $cientologist and believes in the whole space cootie thing, I like his movies for the most part, and wouldn't mind seeing at least some of them in Blu-Ray on my massive TV.

Hail Xenu!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 2:27pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Civilized world without mcd???

Are you kidding me my man?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jope, 18 Nov 2008 @ 3:04pm

Heh...
So let me get this straight... Pirates are basically putting DVDs into Blu-ray boxes, right? And from that you put in a mixer the "hollow victory" comment and some claims about customers complaining about Blu-ray DRM...?

Really, TechDirt, face it: Blu-ray won the war... :D
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 3:05pm

Re: Re: Re: Sour Grapes, much?
"There is a huge difference and only the legally blind (or stupid) can't see it."

The only person who seems legally blind (and stupid) here is you. If you really "need" that crap ass rear projected POS just so you can get that 65" in size, then you're a moron. That's proven by the fact that you didn't even bother to get the rear projection TV based on the LED lamp.

Just because you have an obviously tiny penis and need to compensate for it by having a 65" TV and a triple wide ass errr... I mean trailer, doesn't make all the valid points made here somehow invalid.

Condolences on the penis.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Big Mook (profile), 18 Nov 2008 @ 3:41pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Sour Grapes, much?
I see your point. I was overly harsh in my choice of words. You're not stupid because you don't appreciate great movies and sports viewing at home, you're stupid because you automatically start talking penis size in a Blu-Ray debate.

But as for my POS TV, it has a better, brighter, crisper and clearer picture than any of the avaiable LCDs of the time, and was 6 times less expensive than any LCD or plasma of the same vintage of 60" or more in size. Let me say it again: The only TVs that beat this one for picture quality are plasma, and they were too expensive, IMHO, to even be considered by the average person. Sorry if that makes you feel bad about the huge chunk you laid down for that 42" or smaller set you bought.

I just made the decision that when I finally got a big screen TV, I wasn't going to settle for the small, over-priced TVs that everyone else got duped into buying early in the market.

So I bided my time, finally found a TV with everything I wanted and at the right price and size, and I bought it (at Sear's if you can believe that). Adding Blu-Ray was right for me, as my penis is painfully average in size and my wife says it's big enough to get the job done, anyway. I don't like to steal copyrighted content and can't stand to watch standard definition content on this huge monster if I can help it.

While those of you with circus-large penises can steal content and watch crappy low-def stuff, I guess those of us who are average will go on paying for what we want and getting the better experience for the trouble.

Whatever it takes to rationalize your stance that it's OK to steal content, I guess.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nobody, 18 Nov 2008 @ 3:51pm

Re: Re: I haven't even noticed DRM on the PS3
Not to split hairs, but I always thought N64 games wouldn't work on a gamecube because the N64 used cartridges, and it would be too costly to include a cartridge bay and a disc drive int he gamecube.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nobody, 18 Nov 2008 @ 4:03pm

Re: Heh...
"Really, TechDirt, face it: Blu-ray won the war... :D:"

That's why he used the word victory. It's a hollow victory because it only helps pirates, and regular consumers aren't buying into it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 6:32pm

Looks like I found the hole were all those haters are hiding. LOL.

Sony won the HD format war. No matter the amount of FUD, BS and hate you losers try to spread, the general public are buying more and more Blu-ray.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
torrentfreak, 18 Nov 2008 @ 8:16pm

I want my 700MB x264 Blu-ray rips now.

This is what i was hoping anyway!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
crystalattice (profile), 18 Nov 2008 @ 9:16pm

Re:
Well, I've been boycotting Sony for nearly 5 years. I will not buy a BD player until there is no other choice.

I don't think Sony is in league w/ the pirates. I think Sony is just run by incompetent, ignorant morons.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
crystalattice (profile), 18 Nov 2008 @ 9:30pm

Re: Is 720p considered hi-def?
Depending on screen size and how far away from the TV you are, there is very little difference between 720 and 1080. A 37" screen viewed from 5-6 feet is equivalent (discernable quality wise) from a 42" screen at 8 feet.

If you have a small living room, e.g. apartment, a 720p-only TV will be just as good. Plus, 720p screens are nearly $500 cheaper or more, since they are usually smaller sized too.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Joe Bloe, 18 Nov 2008 @ 10:06pm

The problem with blu-ray
Let’s compare the difference between pirated HD movies and Blu-Ray:

Pirated HD Movies:
Various sources, Blu-Ray, HDDVD, DTheatre and HDTV and any other HD digital source
Able to be recompressed for ipods, phones etc
Able to be backed up easily
Able to be copied to a computer and shared across a network
Able to be copied and shared with friends
Able to work with all capable players, both computer and standalone
Cheap
Good enough quality for probably 90+% of people.

Blue-Ray:
Only movies specifically released on BR.
No facility for ipod, phone versions ( that I know of )
Not possible to backup or copy to a computer.
not always able to work properly with BR players. There has been issues with HDCP and DRM with some players and wont work completely with devices that don’t support HDCP.
More expensive than DVDs and much more expensive than pirated HD movies.
At a high quality that only a small % of people will appreciate.

The problem with Blu-Ray is that it is inferior product that has been crippled by the manufacturer. It is a sad day when the knock-offs are generally better than the original.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 10:52pm

Re:
Ok, what's that supposed to prove anyway? That the pirate making the BD rip was more clueless than the pirate making the DVD rip?

How about comparing the originals instead of making useless comparisons?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2008 @ 10:55pm

Re: Convenience is the name of the game..
I agree 100%.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2008 @ 6:49am

Re:
That's a great theory, too bad you're a retard and have no clue. http://www.crunchgear.com/bff/?p=299
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kbac, 19 Nov 2008 @ 7:41am

Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
I have two 1080 HDTV (CRT and Projection) and a 480i as well, the difference between 480i and 1080p is very noticeable to me but not to my wife but, she has an astigmatism (bad eye sight).

As for "freedom's" comment if you are only 'willing' to pay for a Blue-ray disc if it is less than $10 than you are a pirate (thief) looking for a reason (excuse) to steal media. Don't get me wrong some forms of DRM (namely SecuRom) do go way too far and hurt honest customers to the point it makes the company look like a bully pushing around little kids (EA). But stealing just because you feel it cost too much when other formats exist for much cheaper (with more relaxed forms of DRM) makes you a criminal and a sinner, no differnt than stealing items from a store. If you feel it is too expensive don't buy that format a the company will be forced to change what is making the customers unhappy, Sony HAS noticed that Blue-Ray is not winning over customers from DVD as they had hoped for after winning the format wars so they know something is wrong but when they look to see why and come across comments like your's stating that you would only 'consider' being a customer and not a theif if they sold a top of the line item for less than an inferior format they disregard your comment as the excuses of a theif. Your mentality is clear why buy what can be stolen with ease? As companies see this kind of thinking being preached in forums as a way of life of course they are going to try to stop it before it becomes a run away train but, some do go too far.

Things cost money, Better things cost more money.
Simple economic fact.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2008 @ 2:03pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
Don't want DRM, don't buy it. But don't steal it, either. Therein lies the problem, eh?
Copyright infringement is not theft. Claiming so is a lie. Therein lies a problem, eh?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2008 @ 2:34pm

Re: Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
But stealing just because you feel it cost too much when other formats exist for much cheaper (with more relaxed forms of DRM) makes you a criminal and a sinner, no differnt than stealing items from a store.
It's interesting how you equate sharing copies of things with other people to sinning. I remember a story of someone who did that a couple of thousand years ago. It seems he took a few fish and some bread and made copies of them to share with a whole multitude of people. Now I would imagine that didn't make the local fishermen and bakers real happy but I don't recall that any of them accused him of theft. His name was Jesus.

Now, if you're a Christian and you're accusing people who do such things of being thiefs and sinners then you better start doing some serious soul searching, before it's too late. Bearing false witness against Jesus Christ can't be a good thing. Of course, if you're one of those who worship money instead then I suppose you probably don't much care.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kbac, 19 Nov 2008 @ 2:39pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
"Copyright infringement is not theft." Do you know the difference between 'copywright infringement' and 'piracy'?
...
Did not think so, But just so you know they are two completely different things.

If I was to use the likeness of Sonic The Hedgehog to sell a product without permission from Sega that is 'copywright infringement'

If I was to download the game Sonic The Hedgehog off of a bit torrent that is 'piracy'

Piracy is taking something with paying for it and without permission.

Taking something with paying for it and without permission is THEFT.

Never did I mention copyright infringement... anywhere...

"Don't want DRM, don't buy it. But don't steal it, either. Therein lies the problem, eh?"

No problem you don't 'NEED' a game you 'want' it so if you don't want the DRM you don't 'need' the game.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2008 @ 3:09pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
If I was to use the likeness of Sonic The Hedgehog to sell a product without permission from Sega that is 'copywright infringement'

You don't even seem to know the difference between copyrights and trademarks. (And by the way, there's no "w" in "copyright" either).

Taking something with paying for it and without permission is THEFT.

From where is it missing? Maybe the owner should report the theft to the police and file a claim with their insurance company. Of course, once the owner was discovered to still be in possession of "it" they might be charged with filing a false theft report and insurance fraud. Do you know what prison is? That's what lying like that can get you sometimes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2008 @ 3:14pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
"Never did I mention copyright infringement... anywhere..."

So, if it's legal then how is it theft? If it isn't legal, then what law would you say was violated if not copyright?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2008 @ 3:27pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
Never did I mention copyright infringement... anywhere...
You mean, Big Mook didn't? So Kbac and Big Mook are one and the same, eh? You know, you really should be more careful to avoid mixing up your sock puppets like that. Just how long have you worked for the MPAA anyway? You seem a little green.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Nov 2008 @ 3:47pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Bluray: for movie geeks only
Thanks for the follow-up. It's not everyday on TechDirt that someone avoids flamebait mode in favor of real communication.

This coming from someone going around calling people "idiots", "crybabies", "stupid" and "losers"? Take a look in the mirror buddy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
yonderTheGreat, 19 Nov 2008 @ 8:09pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Oxford Ohio"? I know someone who lives less than an hour from me...

Well, I'm off to update my netflix queue as well, at least until the NXE quits being overloaded.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2008 @ 6:16am

of course bluray is not doing well people like me are affriad that we well spend $400 plus on a player then $25 plus a disc only to have the player reject that disc for no apperent reason then call customer support to be treated like a criminal by some fucking asshole who will no doubt ask over and over "are you sure you have a legal copy? a legal copy should work just fine." to the point I start answering "YES!!! I fucking got a REAL copy from best buy and it does not work but my friends copy from the pirate bay works just fine and he is not FORCED to watch those fucking ads and warnings at the begining everytime him puts his damn disk in!" sorry for the foul words I am a little peeved.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Brandon Eubanks, 20 Nov 2008 @ 7:32am

Pull your head out big media
I've said this time and time again first I said it to big music....some of them apparently listened.
You will not stop piracy with DRM you will only inconvenience your legitimate consumers. The pirates will go merrily along stripping it from your content to the point that they have a better product than your paying customers. You want to stop piracy fine here's how you do it. Make it easier to and cheaper to get the legitmate material than to get the illegal material. Pirates have to search for the material download it convert it to the format they need, burn it ect. Price your media correctly for every possible place, don't limit your customers actions with said media, do the conversion for them, offer it in multiple formats. I'm talking to you content producers no matter what your particular media might be. If your product is an IP product you need to pull your head out of your rear, the internet has been around for a while now you won't be putting the genie back in the bottle anytime soon. For the likes of companies that produce such things as 3D Max, photoshop, dreamweaver how about pricing your products you know in a way that people can actually afford if they aren't leading producers in the graphic/web/publishing biz. If you don't the best you can hope for is that those that can afford it continue to purchase your products, while everyone else either pirates your product or moves to open source software that is comparable learn to work on that and have no need for you anymore. Just my two cents
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Big Mook (profile), 20 Nov 2008 @ 9:08am

Who are the pirates, really?
Just wanted to throw this into the mix, since the assumption that's being put forth by the pro-piracy contingent here is that most people who pirate either can't afford the high prices, or don't want the inconvenience of not being able to port the content to the device of choice because of DRM. (Annoyance at the warnings, previews, and commercials is just comical to me. That's when you should be freshening up your drink and getting the popcorn ready.)

I know a person who can easily afford to purchase what he wants. Both he and his spouse have high-paying, professional careers.

He has stated that he has over 700 ripped movies in his collection, all on physical DVD media. He rips his copies from his Netflix subscription, and from friends or relatives who have actually purchased the product, and to my knowledge has never purchased a single movie himself.

He doesn't rip it so he can watch it on an iPod, phone, PC, etc. He rips straight to DVD to watch it on his home TV. He also usually makes multiple copies to give away to other people in the process.

Now tell me where he fits into your pro-piracy thinking. If this isn't outright theft, then what is it?

This guy can easily afford to buy the product, but uses and keeps hundreds of ripped movies only to watch on a TV at home, and apparently does this just because he can get away with it, and stick it to the rich movie companies in the process.

I think a lot more of the pirates out there are like this guy than most people would like to admit, but they use the excuses of DRM and high cost to justify their theft in their own minds.

I'm not an MPAA fanboy, but I can see both sides of the issue, and I see the above scenario as outright theft.

Thoughts?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2008 @ 11:19am

Re: Who are the pirates, really?
If this isn't outright theft, then what is it?
That's been discussed over and over on this blog. In fact, why don't you just read a few of the comments above this one , Big Mook or Kbac or whatever you're calling yourself now? Probably because you'd rather not address those points, would you?

But to answer the rhetorical question, theft involves actually taking something away from someone else, not just copying it. Those who go around calling copyright infringement "theft" are telling lies.

I'm not an MPAA fanboy, but I can see both sides of the issue, and I see the above scenario as outright theft.

Oh really? You sure sound like an industry shill.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Big Mook (profile), 20 Nov 2008 @ 12:32pm

Re: Re: Who are the pirates, really?
Thank you for keeping this conversation going. I mean that sincerely. I'm trying to understand, really. I realize I've been the biggest asshat in this thread, some of it intentionally way over the top just to get some discussion going.

I don't shill for MPAA or any of the **AA's. As a general rule, I believe they're hurting themselves bigtime with the lawsuits and I agree that Sony should be buried under their own wreckage after the rootkit crap.

I have no problem with someone burning all the copies in the world of content they purchased. Decrypt it, clean it up of adverts and warnings, compress it, whatever, to use it the way you want. Really. Where I have to disagree, however, is with all of the people, many in this thread alone, who honestly think it's OK to just copy from anyone and anywhere and never buy anything themselves.

You stated that you believe copying content isn't stealing, and that's how you justify it for yourself. I can't justify that ethically or morally for myself. You live with your actions, I'll live with mine.

Do I believe that some file-sharing actually helps sales? Yes, absolutely. But the producer of that content should get some say as to whether their product is freely shared.

Do I believe that someone who pirates everything and has never contributed a cent to the industry adds value to the system? Absolutely not.

I feel like this is in the same realm as stealing satellite programming. I mean those satellite providers are just beaming that signal willy-nilly down to the earth, and if I just so happen to have a receiver with the right decryption to allow me to watch for free, then I should be off the hook? I don't think so. But in your argument, you're just accessing a copy of something, not the actual product. In the case of satellite, the encrypted programming is the product, so it is theft in my mind to decrypt it and use the content for yourself.

Trying to be reasonable here, but feel like I'm still going to get hammered.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Johnny # 5, 20 Nov 2008 @ 12:40pm

Kidnapping A.I.?
Okay, lets say piracy is theft (Wait, wait, it gets funny I swear.) now let say you 'steal' a piece of software but, that software has artificial intelligence and that the A.I. is advanced enough to be "self aware" is that then kidnapping? if you make copies of that software is that cloning? and if you delete it is that murder?

I am of course making the assumption that most of the people have watched Startrek: TNG or have seen the movie Short Circuit.

Ps. I am not siding for or against piracy so don't attack me because you could not see the HUMOR in my comment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Johnny # 5, 20 Nov 2008 @ 1:29pm

Well... this is a hammer factory.
Look up above ^ call a pirate a theif and sinner then they will call you the ultimate sinner. I do see both sides, EA and Sony are (and have been) abusing legit customers with Virus like DRM and rootkits, and Sony has a bad track record of trying to screw over its customers just Google the pharses 'ps2 disc read error' and 'ps3 ylod' Sony tries to make the customers pay for repairs on a product (still under warranty) that should have been recalled. And EA hides dangerous DRM in it's products that can not be removed from your computer without the help of a program (likely made by {a} pirate{s}) and after the program is paid for they tell you that you may only install it three times?!? So in this case if the legit version is more dangerous than some viruses and the pirate version has had the DRM (SecuRom) removed? ... well I can see why some would pirate Spore. But on the other side of the spectrum someone that makes good money and is ripping and downloading masses of content just have it for free yes that in my mind is a bad thing. The one thing that makes me lean towards calling piracy 'theft' is when someone is making copies of a program made by a small (50 or less employees) company because that has a direct effect on that person's income which is likely not very high to begin with.

Pirate an obese, abusive company - Who cares
Pirate a little, struggling company - Shame on you.
Pirate Music - W ell... Why does a cd with only one good song cost $16-20? Why must a iTunes song be played only on an iPod? I feel the music industry has in most cases resorted to terrorism (if you pirate or we even think you did you will lose your house, car, everything of value and go to jail.) don't feel the same Google 'riaa terrorism' and 'riaa innocent'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2008 @ 1:48pm

Re: Kidnapping A.I.?
what about the skynet for terminator? murdering it over and over after making many copies would make you a superhero eh?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2008 @ 4:41pm

Re: Re: Re: Who are the pirates, really?
You stated that you believe copying content isn't stealing,
No, I didn't, I stated a fact. It isn't a personal belief, it's the law.

...and that's how you justify it for yourself. I can't justify that ethically or morally for myself. You live with your actions, I'll live with mine.
Justify it for myself? Justify what? "Copying content"? I never said that I do that. I just called you out for lying about it being stealing. And as for ethics and morals, how do you justify lying?

Do I believe that some file-sharing actually helps sales?
Who asked that? Not me. Must be your straw man talking there.

I feel like this is in the same realm as stealing satellite programming.
There you go with the infringement=theft lie again. And what do your feelings have to do with it anyway?

I mean those satellite providers are just beaming that signal willy-nilly down to the earth, and if I just so happen to have a receiver with the right decryption to allow me to watch for free, then I should be off the hook?
The law doesn't say so. It's illegal, but it's not theft.

But in your argument, you're just accessing a copy of something, not the actual product.
Well, I'm not, but some people might. And while it may be illegal, it's not theft.

In the case of satellite, the encrypted programming is the product, so it is theft in my mind to decrypt it and use the content for yourself.
In your mind? Maybe you mind just isn't able to keep to the truth.

Trying to be reasonable here, but feel like I'm still going to get hammered.
Lying is not reasonable. If you want to keep doing so, expect to keep getting rebutted. While you may be trying exercise Goebbels theory that a lie repeated often enough will eventually be accepted as the truth, I don't feel like letting you get away with it today.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2008 @ 4:52pm

Re:
Look up above ^ call a pirate a theif [sic] and sinner then they will call you the ultimate sinner.
How do you know they're a pirate? Bearing a little false witness of your own there, Johnny?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Johnny # 5, 20 Nov 2008 @ 5:21pm

My post is being misunderstood. "call a pirate a theif" a pirate in general, not the "Anonymous Coward" that left that comment, and "They" being the "Anonymous Coward(s)" who love to attack a poster that does not see eye to eye with them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 20 Nov 2008 @ 7:47pm

Re:
Falsely accusing someone of being a thief is not a matter of just not seeing "eye to eye", it's downright dishonest. Trying to characterize it as such is also dishonest.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2008 @ 7:15pm

Re: Re: I haven't even noticed DRM on the PS3
You mean like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFVXcaw8RWQ
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Nov 2008 @ 7:39pm

Re: I haven't even noticed DRM on the PS3
Now take someone like me I do not have the internet at my house so if I was to buy a PS3 I would have to lug that heavy ass brick to a friends house to get any missing updates. Sounds like more of a hassle than I want to deal with.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anton, 16 Feb 2009 @ 1:13am

720p blue ray pirate
Hi, is it really 720p?

Have seen pirated blue ray transfers but video resolution is only 720 x 480 SD. Very clear (Copy) but still not HD.
Sound is good DTS-ES 1.5 mbps core.

What is Audio/Video spec for pirated 720P = ??

Cheers!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Blu ray DVD, 6 Aug 2009 @ 1:10am

Pirate copies never satisfy
Some people I know usually buy a pirate copy only to find disappointment in the quality and then they pay extra to by the real thing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tt, 20 Jun 2013 @ 11:47am

Willing to do without
I DO believe the content creators need to be paid. Why not charge a tax on all the blank media and burners to cover some of the cost, especially those who want the movies, but can't buy all of them due to job loss, e.t.c. MPAA would get some of the money. If I get forced to buy into Blu-ray, I am going with a laptop, Blu-ray burner, ripper, just to be sure it always works. With changing DRM, it makes no sense to get a dedicated player, if you have to have computer to get firmware update or have internet. I am not interested to waste many blank blurays, my main plan would be rewriteable versions. I have also bought some DVDs when I had money to buy them, so a copy is not always a lost sale. I was wondering, why didn't they make Blu-ray burners and blanks illegal, and keep Blu-ray off computers? Maybe they knew the format would have died off. (PSP movies came out, but after no burners or media allowed for them, the format disappeared)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tt, 20 Jun 2013 @ 12:05pm

Forced Rippers?
Not to mention, the constant updates to Cyberlink, the disabling of analog connections like VGA, and the forcing of an all HDMI connection, and having to buy a new license after so many updates just to watch a movie, and the support of Cinavia DRM on Cyberlink, I may as well go with the other guy company who will supply a ripper and a player that doesn't support that junk just so it all works. It also takes a while to rip a movie, so it is a bit of trouble, but it is worth your freedom. Even if I could copy to my hearts content with Blu-ray, I am open to the format dying off and a more consumer friendly format appearing. Most laptops have an HDMI connection. The AACS administrators have hosed the early adopters and the new dedicated players only have an HDMI connection, so they have now officially closed the analog hole, though I don't know how that is supposed to stop anything. Right now, there is Screen Pass protection that makes the ripped chapters play out of order, and a new X Protect that makes the original disc appear to the computer as an over sized file, like more than 50GB for Blu-ray in order to confuse the drive. The way Hollywood is going, it seems that they are discouraging anyone having a dedicated player, and driving people to go the laptop ripper route, which doesn't make any sense if you don't want movies ripped. I figure, keep the Blu-ray blanks expensive, and that should help, but make it hard by too much, and the format fails. Remember DIVX? It didn't matter if one could hook up a VCR or early DVD recorder to copy the movie in real time, it was so much trouble just to use the product, people weren't interested, so the ability to capture the content wasn't enough to save the format.
[ link to this | view in thread ]