Apple Trying To Sneak Safari Onto Windows Machines?

from the nobody-here-but-us-safaris dept

Last week, Apple apparently began distributing its Safari web browser to Windows users using the software update mechanism that comes with iTunes. This has generated a firestorm of controversy, notably from Mozilla CEO John Lilly, who says Apple's behavior undermines users' trust in the software update process. He's got a point. What Apple is doing here is a little bit sleazy. Users who opt to download iTunes aren't necessarily interested in installing or running Safari, and so making installation the default is an abuse of the relationship between Apple and its customers. On the other hand, I think it's important to make it clear that there's nothing inherently wrong with Apple using its installed base of iTunes users to help promote Safari. The issue here is that the opt-out mechanism it's chosen is somewhat misleading. Apple can fix the problem very easily by switching the default, so that Safari is unchecked until the user chooses to check it. Or, if Apple wants to be a little more aggressive, a pop-up window could require the user to make a yes or no choice on installing Safari. If the user clicks "no," the update mechanism should respect this choice and not bring it up again. The problem, in other words, is not that Apple is using the popularity of iTunes to promote another of its products. The problem is that it's not being as transparent as it could be with its users.

Filed Under: default, downloads, opt-in, opt-out, safari
Companies: apple

Blu-Ray Will Likely Catch On Despite Flaws

from the patience dept

I've had my own share of criticisms of the Blu-Ray format in the past, but even I think the thesis that Blu-ray is doomed is over the top. Don Reisinger claims that having won the battle with HD-DVD, Sony's Blu-Ray format is still going to lose the war of consumer indifference. I think there's clearly something to this. Clearly, lots of people are still buying DVDs, and the reasons Reisinger identifies -- inflexible DRM, high prices, many consumers' inability to tell the difference between HD and regular definition content -- are certainly reasons to expect uptake of the Blu-Ray format to be relatively slow. But I think it's important to keep the longer-term perspective in mind. People were saying many of the same things about the DVD format a decade ago: complaining about the price and wondering if consumers would care about the quality difference. But the DVD format is indisputably successful. Prices came down. Consumers got used to the higher quality of DVD. It didn't happen in a year, but it took less than a decade.

The same thing will happen with Blu-Ray. Blu-Ray players today are no more expensive than DVDs were a decade ago, and the PS3 doubles as a video game console. As people upgrade their TVs, more and more of them will get used to high-def picture quality. We've pointed out before that faster bandwidth will ultimately render physical formats obsolete. But fortunately for Sony, as bad as Blu-Ray's DRM is, the download services' DRM is even worse. You can at least be reasonably sure you'll be able to play your Blu-Ray disc on most TVs, something that's often not true of video download services. So in the short run, Blu-Ray probably has time to reach critical mass among consumers before Hollywood figures out how to design a movie download service consumers will actually be interested in. Blu-Ray would catch on faster if it weren't for the issues Reisinger identifies, but I don't think there's much doubt Sony and its partners will sell tens of millions of the things.

Filed Under: blu-ray, downloads, drm, dvd
Companies: sony

Why A Music Download Tax Is A Bad Idea

from the unintended-consequences dept

In the last few weeks, a lot of folks have been submitting the story about the Songwriters Association of Canada (SAC) proposing a $5/month "tax" on ISP connections, which could then be used to reimburse songwriters and musicians for downloading. I've resisted writing about it, because it's been discussed at length in the past when it's been suggested. The one difference here is that a group of musicians is actually supporting it. However, Michael Geist does an excellent job explaining why it's not a very good idea. Beyond pissing off those who don't feel they should subsidize the rest of the industry, it's not at all clear it's necessary. There are plenty of other business models that the music industry can use to support musicians and songwriters that don't require a special tax. However, the biggest reason, as Geist points out, is the second you do this, plenty of other industries will come out of the woodwork demanding a special fee get applied to internet connections as well. Newspapers that think Google and Craigslist are "stealing" from them will demand a special "news tax." And then think of all those other industries who claim they're being impacted by the internet. You'll have a special auto-mechanic's tax, to pay for mechanics who are upset about the DIY info found online. The "knitting tax" for all the free knitting patterns online. I understand that AAA may be upset about Google maps. Travel agents want that "travel tax" to pay for all that business that Expedia has cost them. Where does it stop?

Filed Under: canada, downloads, isp tax

EU Court Tells ISPs They Don't Have To Hand Over Downloader Names

from the privacy-and-such dept

We were just noting how Europe seemed to recognize that having ISPs simply hand over the IP addresses of individuals could be a violation of privacy, and along comes the EU's top court to confirm that stance. The European Court of Justice has come down with a decision stating that entertainment industry companies cannot force ISPs to hand over IP addresses, though local governments could put in place rules that would compel them to do so. It seems rather interesting that just as the entertainment industry is pushing for increased ISP liability, the courts are recognizing the sorts of privacy issues this raises. It makes you wonder how the courts will feel when the entertainment industry tells ISPs they need to monitor every file transferred to make sure it contains no unauthorized material.

Filed Under: downloads, eu, europe, file sharing, privacy

Best Selling Author Actively Pirating His Own Book -- Finds It Helps Sales Tremendously

from the the-benefits-of-free dept

We've been seeing more and more examples lately of content creators recognizing how they benefit from giving away their content for free. What's most amusing, however, is that every time we point out an example, people work extra hard explaining why that case is a special case. When we discussed less-well-known musicians giving away music, we were told that it would never work for megastars. When we discussed megastars giving away music, we were told it would never work for indie musicians. The same is true in other areas as well. When we recently wrote about an author giving his book away for free, someone angrily emailed to let us know that this only made sense because no one had ever heard of that author -- so it was purely a promotional effort by a new author.

Yet, apparently, it also works for well-known authors. TorrentFreak points us to the news that Paulo Coelho is such a fan of giving his book away for free that he's even set up his own blog called Pirate Coehlo where he points to where you can download various translations of his best selling book The Alchemist. Coelho explained all of this in a recent talk he gave:
Link: sevenload.com What Coelho quickly discovered was that the more his book was available for free, the more sales of the actual book increased. As an example, he cites the Russian translation of his book, where it went from only 1,000 sales to well over 100,000 in a period of two years, and has only continued to grow since then. It's yet another good example of someone embracing how giving away content for free can help them earn more money. And, it highlights (again) that, whether you're well known or a nobody, you can use these tactics to your advantage.

Filed Under: authors, books, downloads, free content, paulo coelho

How Many Separate Video Players Do I Really Need?

from the ask-Mr.-Owl dept

Downloading TV shows and movies is clearly becoming a competitive market as Netflix and Apple (as well as many others) start offering video on demand services. But with each new offering, it seems like viewers need a separate and proprietary piece of video playing software which is obviously aimed at enhancing the viewing experience for the audience. The DRM and the crazy number of different time limitations for how long you can watch you downloaded shows are really just bonus features. Imagine the glorious future of watching a la carte videos where every distribution channel has its own player and set of rules for how you can consume the content. Future DVRs will incorporate access control systems that would rival the most complex enterprise content management systems of today. I can't wait to click through dozens of end-user agreements just to watch my favorite time-shifted shows! Progress is great.

While my vision of the future for watching videos in the US will hopefully be averted due to competition with BitTorrent, the EU is facing a tangled web of content regulation right now. Each of the 27 members of the European Union currently has its own right to agree to content distribution deals with video vendors, creating a patchwork of regulatory requirements that will likely hinder the development of pan-European media services. The New York Times notes that this situation will likely benefit the IP lawyers in Europe over the next few years, as service providers and content owners battle over each country's legal requirements. While the European Commission is trying to create a more consumer-friendly set of regulations that every nation in the EU can agree to, it seems somewhat unlikely to happen in a timely fashion. The irony is that many of these video on demand services are aimed at giving consumers a legal alternative to piracy, but the red tape and legal disputes will be likely to point consumers to pirating until the dust has settled.

Filed Under: downloads, drm, eu, time-shifting, video
Companies: apple, hbo, netflix, xbox

MovieBeam Finally Dead For Real

from the how-much-money-was-wasted-on-that? dept

Back in 2003, Disney's brilliant idea to "compete" with TiVo and Netflix was to start MovieBeam. Just the fact that Disney felt it needed to compete with TiVo and Netflix shows you how backwards the thinking was at the point. Moviebeam was a terrible idea from the start. People were expected to buy (yet another) expensive set top box from Disney, which would basically be a very limited DVR. The hard drive would come packed with about 100 movies, and each week some would disappear and others would magically "beam" into the box. Despite the fact that you already had to pay for the box, you still had to pay each time you wanted to watch a movie -- and, you were only given a 24-hour time period in which to watch that movie. Two years into the program (with only a few small test markets) Disney shut down the program. At the time, we figured it was gone for good, but somehow, some VCs and Cisco were convinced to pony up $50 million to bring this idea back to life as a spinoff from Disney. Yet, when the offering was relaunched (with a few small improvements) people still didn't care. Earlier this year, the company was basically sold off for next to nothing, and now the company has announced that it's shutting down operations next week. Who knows, though, maybe it'll rise from the dead again, so that it can fail a few more times.

Filed Under: downloads, movies, settop box
Companies: disney, moviebeam

RIAA Told To Hand Over Data On Cost Per Download

from the constitutionality-questions dept

Earlier this year, a court agreed to examine whether or not the fines the RIAA is asking for in its lawsuits against people accused of file sharing is constitutional (that whole "cruel and unusual" bit). The RIAA, in response, has fought hard to keep from revealing any information about how much a download really costs, but a judge isn't having any of that and has ordered the RIAA in the UMG v. Lindor case to turn over the data.

Filed Under: constitutionality, cost, downloads, fines, lindor, riaa
Companies: riaa

Movie Director Thrilled About Downloaders... But Producer Still Suing

from the left-hand,-meet-right-hand dept

Remember how some independent movie directors and producers were thrilled that people found their movies worthwhile to download? Well, here's a disturbing twist on those types of stories. TorrentFreak tells us about how the director of a popular Norwegian film is thrilled that people are downloading copies of his movie, and even admits that he uses BitTorrent to download stuff himself: "It's flattering that people are making copies of the movie and releasing it on the internet. Besides, all movies today are released onto the web. It would have been worse if no one wanted to share the movie." So what's the twist? The production company behind the movie is going after those people who were file sharing the movie, asking the police to file charges against 14 people accused of sharing the movie. Once again, it seems like the left-hand isn't paying attention to what the right-hand is doing.

Filed Under: downloads, movies

Independent Film Makers Thrilled That People 'Pirated' Their Movie

from the understanding-buzz dept

On the same day that the guy who was caught filming the Simpson's movie with his mobile phone (which still doesn't make sense to us) was fined in Australia, some independent film makers are talking up how wonderful it is that people are "pirating" their film. The website rslog.net reviewed their film, The Man from Earth, and pointed out the many places online where it could be downloaded. It turned out that people really seemed to love the movie. Thousands downloaded it... and they started promoting it to others. The movie's ranking on IMDB shot up and it's getting attention from all over the place. The producer of the movie wrote to rslog to thank them for promoting the movie, noting that next time he'll probably upload his next movie to various torrent sites himself.

The director of the movie also chimed in with his support. He notes that they definitely view this a bit as "doing a Radiohead," but that's perfectly reasonable. They're hoping many people do decide to buy the DVD or donate money to the project, which seems like a reasonable request. However, what may be more likely is that they can use this groundswell to push for both theater showings of the movie and a distribution deal for their followup. And while this shows an example of moviemakers using the Radiohead example -- there's a big difference here as well. Many critics have been falsely dismissing the Radiohead experiment by saying that only big, well known bands can pull it off. However, what the folks behind this movie are doing is exactly the opposite. They're smaller names, who are generating tremendous publicity and opportunity for themselves by not treating their fans as criminals -- even those who clearly are downloading unauthorized versions. Instead, they're embracing them for the free publicity they're providing the movie and helping to turn it into a hit. Once again, the old saying is true: obscurity is a much bigger threat to creative works than piracy.

Filed Under: downloads, movies