stories filed under: "dvds"
Hollywood Threatens To Stop Selling DVDs In Spain In A Push To Increase Unauthorized File Sharing?
from the confused dept
Robert Ring points us to the news that Hollywood studios are now threatening to stop selling DVDs in Spain, and are blaming "piracy." Specifically, Michael Lynton, of Sony Pictures, the guy who insists that nothing good has come from the internet, is claiming:"Spain is on the brink of no longer being a viable home-entertainment market for us."I'm really curious how Lynton keeps his job when his response to a market challenge is to leave the market entirely, shifting the unauthorized rate from whatever it is all the way up to 100% by choice. This is the same guy who claimed that the internet was killing the movie business, in the midst of a year with more movie releases than ever before and the largest box office take ever. He's also in charge of the company that wouldn't even support one of its own movies for the Oscars because it was afraid that the Oscar reviewer copies would end up online, even though the movie was already available for download.
This is a CEO who seems to want to blame everyone else for his own failures in giving people a reason to buy. He's blaming the internet when the real issue is his own inability to figure out how to provide scarce value that people want to pay for. I can't imagine how the board meetings go: "Hey, so how are you capitalizing on this massive increase in movie interest?" "Ah, well, we're dropping out of markets because the kids download." How do you manage to lead a company when your response to a boom in interest in your business is to take away one of the reasons to buy and then to blame the people who want your product? It's astounding.
Warner Bros. Latest Movie Release Strategy? Confuse The Hell Out Of The Market And Prop Up Blockbuster?
from the at-least-that's-what-it-appears-to-be dept
It's tough to figure Warner Bros. out these days. It got both Netflix and Redbox to agree to delay renting new release movies for 28 days in an effort to get more people to purchase DVDs. For this, it got hit with a class action lawsuit. But now comes the news that it's signed a new deal with the financially troubled Blockbuster that has no such restriction. This has lots of people scratching their heads. The obvious answer is that Blockbuster is promising Warner a lot more money...But there's a bigger issue here, which goes beyond just commentators scratching their heads: this is going to confuse a lot of customers at a time when that's the last thing Warner Bros. should be doing. Your average movie renter isn't paying attention to the silly games that Warner execs are playing, and all they want to know is how come they can't rent the latest release. If Warner somehow convinced all players not to rent until a certain date, then that would effectively have just shifted the release date further back (a dumb move in an age when windows are shrinking... but that's Hollywood for you). However, by having the movie available for rental in some places, but not others, it's now setting itself up for mass customer confusion, where people will hear that a movie is available, but then get pissed off that it's not available in their preferred rental system.
It's as if the folks in Hollywood haven't been paying attention to what happens to companies that aren't providing what their customers want.
Filed Under: dvds, movies, rentals, windows
Companies: blockbuster, netflix, redbox, warner bros.
Indiana County Decides Not To Charge Redbox After Public Outcry
from the lawsuit-by-public-opinion-poll dept
Last week we wrote about how prosecutors in Indiana were threatening to file criminal charges against Redbox execs unless the company agreed to remove R-rated movies from its kiosks. The whole thing was instigated by brick-and-mortar video stores who didn't like competing with Redbox's $1 video rentals. However, as news spread about this threat, it seems that the residents of that county raised their voices and let the prosecutor know they wanted to keep their Redbox and its R-rated movies. The prosecutor noted that the standard for whether this was a problem was "community standards," and the community made it loud and clear to him that they wanted the Redbox kiosks to stay:"It's not an exact barometer -- I didn't take a poll -- but it just seemed pretty clear to me that the community would not be behind the prosecution of this," Stan Levco said during Friday's news conference.While it's good that he's backed down, I'm still not sure which is more troubling, that he initiated the threats at the behest of competitors, or that public outcry alone was enough to get him to back down.
Filed Under: dvds, indiana, movie rentals, movies
Companies: redbox
RealNetworks Agrees To Pay $4.5 Million In Legal Fees To Hollywood Over RealDVD; Gives Up
from the something's-wrong-with-the-system dept
We still can't quite understand Hollywood's crusade against RealNetworks over its RealDVD offering. The software presented a way for DVD owners to backup their DVDs. It didn't allow for distribution -- unlike pretty much every other ripping software. In fact, Real basically put a new DRM around each backup copy. Personally, this seemed to make the product less useful, but the MPAA still sued RealNetworks for daring to let people backup their movies, and amazingly won nearly every aspect of the lawsuit. The judge (the same one who shut down Napster, by the way) had already banned the sale of RealDVD, and now she's agreed to a settlement that basically involves RealNetworks conceding every point, and paying $4.5 million to Hollywood to cover legal fees. It's a full capitulation.So what did Hollywood accomplish here? It shut down a software product that allows people to backup the DVDs they legally own -- not to distribute them. In the meantime, of course, there are a bunch of DVD ripping programs out there that have no such restrictions. In other words, Hollywood's brilliant legal strategists just pushed anyone who wants to back up their movies to use solutions that make it easier for them to share those movies with others. It just made sure that such products will always be underground, rather than where the industry can actually work together with them. Congrats, guys, for killing yet another tech product you didn't like, just because it made your products more valuable.
Filed Under: copyright, drm, dvds, movies, realdvd, ripped dvds
Companies: mpaa, realnetworks
Indiana Prosecutor Threatens Redbox With Criminal Charges If It Doesn't Remove R-Rated Movies
from the let-me-introduce-you-to-the-constitution dept
Brandon alerts us to the news that an Indiana prosecutor is threatening to bring criminal charges against Redbox execs if they don't remove R-rated videos from the kiosks. The claim, of course, is that this makes it easier for those under 17 to access those movies. Of course, that doesn't explain what's actually criminal about it. Indiana is among the handful of states that should know this -- seeing as politicians there tried to pass a law stopping retailers from selling "mature" video games to kids -- but every law of that nature has been thrown out. The current movie rating system is not, in fact, enforced by the government as that would be a restriction on free speech. Instead, it's a voluntary agreement within the movie industry. In other words, there is no legal issue with these kiosks.And, of course, the true story behind this threat is found early on in the article. It has nothing to do with "protecting the children" at all. Instead, this is a bunch of independent video rental stores trying to shut down the competition:
"I'm not on a crusade," said Paul Black, an Evansville attorney who says he suggested the inquiry to Levco's office on behalf of a client who operates several video store locations. "We're just looking for a level playing field here."That's not leveling the playing field. It's trying to block competition -- and doing so with bogus charges of criminal behavior.
Filed Under: criminal charges, dvds, free speech, indiana, kiosks, movies, r-rated
Companies: redbox
Reminder: You Don't Compete With Piracy By Being Lame, The DVD Edition
from the fbi-warning dept
It's a point we've tried to make over and over again: you don't compete with "piracy" by offering a product that's a lot worse. And yet, so many people do. A bunch of you have sent over the following image that highlights this in the DVD world (tragically, no one seems to know who made this image -- but if anyone knows, please tell us in the comments and we'll add it to the post). It shows how an unauthorized downloaded copy of The Matrix lets you start watching it immediately. But if you purchase the legitimate DVD, it forces you to sit through multiple FBI warnings and multiple trailers for other movies, with no ability to skip past them. It's humorous, but the point it makes is really important. When your product is less valuable (and yes, that includes being more annoying) than the unauthorized alternatives, you're going to be hard pressed to get people to agree to pay you for your product.
Click for larger version.
Filed Under: consumer experience, dvds, piracy
Wal-Mart, Target Trying To Block Redbox From Purchasing DVDs?
from the how-nice-of-them dept
We've described how some film studios are in a huge legal fight with Redbox over DVD rentals. While some studios have come to their senses and are happy to work with Redbox, others have been trying to pressure the company into giving it a cut of rental revenue and/or delaying when it rents newly-released movies. Those studios convinced the big distribution wholesalers to stop selling to Redbox (which seems like a pretty clear restraint of trade or antitrust issue), and in at least one case had convinced retailers not to sell to Redbox. Of course, there are ways around that as well, and we even suggested that Redbox could crowdsource its movie purchasing.In fact, to get around the studio blocks, Redbox was apparently already purchasing 40% of its DVDs at retail locations like Target and Wal-Mart. But both retailers are now making that more difficult. They've put in place limits directly targeted at Redbox, saying they won't sell more than five DVDs at any one time to any buyer. Yes, here we have a customer willing to buy an awful lot of product -- at full retail price -- and these retailers won't let them? While they claim it's to make sure movies are available for other customers, given the earlier reports of studios specifically asking retailers to block Redbox from buying, it makes you wonder. What sort of company would tell willing customers they can't buy a product that is available and in stock?
Still, in the end I doubt those limits will be very effective. Redbox still could go with that crowdsourced concept, and get its subscribers to purchase five DVDs at a time in exchange for free rentals. Eventually, the industry is going to have to realize that fighting Redbox is a mistake.
Filed Under: antitrust, dvds, rentals, restraint of trade
Companies: redbox, target, wal-mart
Malaysia's New Copyright Act To Make Owning A Single Counterfeit DVD Illegal
from the can't-have-any-sort-of-competition dept
All over the world, it seems, the entertainment industry keeps pushing for ever more draconian copyright laws. Copycense points us to the latest out of Malaysia, where an amendment to the Copyright Act would making owning a single counterfeit DVD illegal. Yes, just owning it. In most places, it's distributing or reproducing that causes infringement. But now we're adding owning to the list. Imagine buying what you thought was a legitimate DVD and then being dragged to court for it. That seems reasonable.Filed Under: copyright, counterfeit, dvds, malaysia
Netflix Exec Claims That Delaying Movie Rentals For A Month Benefits Customers
from the assuming-you-didn't-want-to-see-that-movie-when-it-was-released dept
With Netflix caving in to Warner Bros. and agreeing to delay offering DVDs for 28 days after release in order to get movies to stream online, it certainly pissed off a bunch of Netflix subscribers. But, you've apparently got it all wrong. A Netflix exec is now trying to explain how the deal is pro-customer because it will keep demand down for the DVDs, meaning that when they finally do come out, you may have a better chance to rent them. Seriously:The most practical reason is that the savings derived from this deal enable us to be in stock completely on day 29. Remember that we're a subscription service and the way that you manage the economics of a subscription service is to manage the demand of any disc, depending on the economics of the disc. In the case of the most expensive disc, which in this case is a Warner Bros. disc, purchased through a 3rd party, those discs were out of stock for far longer than 29 days for most Netflix subscribers.I'm still trying to parse this, but it really does sound like he's saying that Netflix couldn't handle the demand for new releases before, so by getting rid of them entirely, it may be able to handle them on the 29th day, since fewer people will care about renting that movie then. Now, you could claim that's a better customer experience if you ignore the 28 days in which no one on Netflix can rent the movie (though they can get it elsewhere). But if you realize that you're now taking away the ability to serve all of your customers for nearly a month at the point when their demand is likely to be the highest... well, that doesn't seem very customer friendly at all.
So what were able to is create a deal with them that gave them a little open running room in terms of creating a sell-through window ahead of rental, for us, and hopefully that they'll find enough value in that it'll extend to other retailers and other studios will take note and it'll extend across other studios as well. The net savings derived from technically creating a better customer experience have been redeployed in additional streaming content for all customers.
Filed Under: delays, dvds, rentals, spin, windows
Companies: netflix, warner bros.
