Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Hollywood Studios, Movie Rentals, and Idiocy

Hollywood Studios, Movie Rentals, and Idiocy (Page 2)
Thread Tools
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 13, 2012, 12:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by ort888 View Post
Warner Bros doesn't like Netflix and is just trying to harm them in any way they can. That's all this really is.
That would fit under "Obstructionist"
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 13, 2012, 02:37 PM
 
I still have a big issue with DVD pricing, its why I don't buy them.

Printing a DVD is far, far cheaper than manufacturing and writing a VHS tape ever was, yet new release VHS movies were between £12.99 and £15.99 before they stopped making them. At that time, new release DVDs were £19.99+
They justified it by pointing out the DVD extras, but who looks at those anymore? Especially for mindless blockbusters. Cult classics like LOTR maybe, but Men in Black 3? No, thanks not paying for that.

Now factor in the cost of the movie itself. Terminator 2 cost well over $100M. Waterworld was over $200M and Titanic topped $400M I believe. Very little since then has cost over $50M that I know of, many don't get near that figure.

This all points to the fact DVDs should be noticably cheaper than VHS used to be. They aren't.

I think many more people would buy many more DVDs if they were £8 each new and came down from there.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
boy8cookie
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I'll let you know when I get there...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 13, 2012, 03:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I still have a big issue with DVD pricing, its why I don't buy them.

Printing a DVD is far, far cheaper than manufacturing and writing a VHS tape ever was, yet new release VHS movies were between £12.99 and £15.99 before they stopped making them. At that time, new release DVDs were £19.99+
They justified it by pointing out the DVD extras, but who looks at those anymore? Especially for mindless blockbusters. Cult classics like LOTR maybe, but Men in Black 3? No, thanks not paying for that.

Now factor in the cost of the movie itself. Terminator 2 cost well over $100M. Waterworld was over $200M and Titanic topped $400M I believe. Very little since then has cost over $50M that I know of, many don't get near that figure.

This all points to the fact DVDs should be noticably cheaper than VHS used to be. They aren't.

I think many more people would buy many more DVDs if they were £8 each new and came down from there.
I don't disagree with you in that DVDs are overpriced, but your reasoning in terms of the cost to make the movie is inaccurate.

The Numbers - Movie Budgets
According to this, there are over 700 movies made in the last 15 years with budgets >$50M.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 13, 2012, 03:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Printing a DVD is far, far cheaper than manufacturing and writing a VHS tape ever was, yet new release VHS movies were between £12.99 and £15.99 before they stopped making them. At that time, new release DVDs were £19.99+
And there is also inflation.

Many things that cost $/£10 ten years ago cost now $/£15 or more.
And since the majority of the cost of movies is salaries and people cost, it's clear that inflation plays a huge role, and typical "technology efficiiency gains" play almost no role.

-t
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 13, 2012, 03:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
So does anyone actually think this will increase sales? I ask because I see a lot of arguing over everything but the actual topic at hand.
Well I think I've made my position clear on this. But just to reiterate .... hell no! There will not be a material amount of people who would otherwise rent that decide to purchase just because they made them wait for 2 months.

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
This just looks like some obstructionist or delusional shit to me.
Indeed.

OAW
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 13, 2012, 03:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Well I think I've made my position clear on this. But just to reiterate .... hell no! There will not be a material amount of people who would otherwise rent that decide to purchase just because they made them wait for 2 months.
That wasn't directed to you as you started the thread and I did read most of the post.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 13, 2012, 08:09 PM
 
Originally Posted by boy8cookie View Post
I don't disagree with you in that DVDs are overpriced, but your reasoning in terms of the cost to make the movie is inaccurate.

The Numbers - Movie Budgets
According to this, there are over 700 movies made in the last 15 years with budgets >$50M.
This list is highly surprising.

How the hell did Resident Evil cost less to make than Sweet Home Alabama? That makes no sense.
CGI is expensive. Seems like it would still be cheaper to actually wreck real stuff more often than not.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
brassplayersrock²
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 13, 2012, 08:57 PM
 
^ location scouting, airfair ect

with cgi, all you need is basically one location and a backdrop
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 14, 2012, 11:07 AM
 
Noooo. Look at the list again. Those recent movies near the top are there because of all the CGI. Look at Avatar or the Pixar films.

CGI is very, very expensive.

I'm thinking a lot of the money for SHA probably went to Reese Witherspoon.

I stand by my point though. There are some FX where it would be cheaper to blow things up than to CG it. If you bought some land just over the border in Mexico to get around some of the health and safty and insurance costs, you'd make a killing in Hollywood.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 14, 2012, 11:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by ort888 View Post
If you can put a TV show on TV, for free, supported only by advertising... then why can't that same show be financially successful streamed online with advertising?
Because they make A LOT of money through advertising and those ads are paid for based on the *assumption* that you're watching.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 14, 2012, 11:36 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
This list is highly surprising.

How the hell did Resident Evil cost less to make than Sweet Home Alabama? That makes no sense.
CGI is expensive. Seems like it would still be cheaper to actually wreck real stuff more often than not.
I'd be willing to bet that Reese Witherspoon in 2002 was more expensive than Milla Jovovich+CGI in 2002.
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2012, 11:44 AM
 
Started to create a new thread for this but I figured it was applicable here. So Spartacus: Vengeance premieres tonight on Starz. It's the second season of the popular Spartacus series. Like a lot of people I watched this via Netflix streaming. Netflix paid Starz 30 million to stream their content ... which was great because it was some of the only new release material available. Well it was a huge hit and the contract is expiring in a week or so. Starz wanted more money and Netflix reportedly offered them 300 million. A tenfold increase. But Starz balked because ON TOP OF THAT they wanted Netflix to charge their customers a "premium" fee to access their content instead of the standard flat rate.

Netflix offered $300 million-plus, but Starz wanted higher consumer prices - latimes.com

Netflix refused and Starz broke off contract renewal talks. So no Spartacus: Vengeance tonight on Netflix. Which sucks as a consumer and a fan. All because these idiots at the studios decided to leave 300 million bucks on the table because they are too busy trying to replicate the same old stale "cable TV" business model on the internet. I for one have no intention of subscribing to Starz and giving U-verse even more money just to watch one show. So I guess I'll have to wait until it comes out on DVD/Blu-ray. Plus 2 extra months. Because the last Blockbuster within 10 miles of my house is in the process of closing at this very moment. Dumb asses.

OAW
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2012, 11:47 AM
 
I really gotta finish rewatching Party Down this weekend.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2012, 12:10 PM
 
Party Down rules.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2012, 12:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I really gotta finish rewatching Party Down this weekend.
Not a bad idea. Apparently the Starz/Netflix contract expires sometime in February.

OAW
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2012, 01:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Started to create a new thread for this but I figured it was applicable here. So Spartacus: Vengeance premieres tonight on Starz. It's the second season of the popular Spartacus series. Like a lot of people I watched this via Netflix streaming. Netflix paid Starz 30 million to stream their content ... which was great because it was some of the only new release material available. Well it was a huge hit and the contract is expiring in a week or so. Starz wanted more money and Netflix reportedly offered them 300 million. A tenfold increase. But Starz balked because ON TOP OF THAT they wanted Netflix to charge their customers a "premium" fee to access their content instead of the standard flat rate.

Netflix offered $300 million-plus, but Starz wanted higher consumer prices - latimes.com

Netflix refused and Starz broke off contract renewal talks. So no Spartacus: Vengeance tonight on Netflix. Which sucks as a consumer and a fan. All because these idiots at the studios decided to leave 300 million bucks on the table because they are too busy trying to replicate the same old stale "cable TV" business model on the internet. I for one have no intention of subscribing to Starz and giving U-verse even more money just to watch one show. So I guess I'll have to wait until it comes out on DVD/Blu-ray. Plus 2 extra months. Because the last Blockbuster within 10 miles of my house is in the process of closing at this very moment. Dumb asses.

OAW
I would just pirate anything from Starz any more not give them a cent for there stupidity.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2012, 01:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
I would just pirate anything from Starz any more not give them a cent for there stupidity.
Words of Wisdom.
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2012, 01:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens View Post
I would just pirate anything from Starz any more not give them a cent for there stupidity.
To be fair though .... it's not totally the studio's fault. The cable operators play a big role in all of this foolishness. They fork over big money for rights to studio content during certain distribution windows. And they are none too pleased with their customers paying an extra $14/month on top of their basic cable bill to access "premium" content ... while Netflix was offering the same content for $8/month. Naturally they put a lot of pressure on the Starz to scuttle the deal with Netflix. And Starz folded in order to not jeopardize the lucrative deals it already has in place with the cable operators who are much bigger fish in the pond than Netflix. While I can grudgingly understand their reasoning in the short-term ... in the long-term they are still being idiots for abandoning the internet as a distribution channel altogether.

OAW
     
ort888
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your Anus
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 27, 2012, 03:01 PM
 
Netflix is going to be squeezed out of business. The writing is on the wall.

10 years we're going to look back at this era of TV watching and laugh at how primitive and backwards it was... but the time leading up to it is going to be an ugly mess of competing standards.

My sig is 1 pixel too big.
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2012, 02:18 AM
 
The entire industry is now garbage when it comes to Movies, TV and Music. They have no clue how to make money any more. They are holding on to old models that do not work any more. I dumped my Cable recently because I couldn't justify the high cost for crap TV. And a lot of what is on TV today is garbage. I can download the same stuff almost the same time it is on TV. And having to pay for time shifting for the same shows is utter garbage.

They restrict content in such a way it forces people to pirate. The only CD's for example in most stores are only the best selling ones. If I want to find something from 10 years ago I liked in physical form good luck.

Then the prices are also out of wack. I wont pay more then 10 bucks for a DVD and prefer CDs for even less. And when I see music CDs for 17 bucks and DVDs for 20+ I stop and think, vs the impulse buy of it being lower. I have nearly 400 DVDs and almost all of them for 10.00 or less.

Another thing that irks me is artificial quality degradation of discount movies like at Wal-Mart. I accidentally bought a movie twice, one new release full price, cuz i felt like spending extra and a couple years later bought it as a discount one at Super Store by mistake. The one for 10.00 was noticeably lower quality, higher compression then the full retail priced one I bought a few years earlier. When played on a 50" TV the quality difference was astounding.

And lastly digital content is WAY over priced. There is no physical product. Just 1's and 0's and bandwidth. I am not going to pay 10.00 for a digital album ever. I am not going to spend 20.00 on a digital movie ever. They would sell a hell of a lot more digital content if it was priced better. If movies where $2.00 to buy I would have bought 500+ by now.

Worse thing to is they go to war with consumers for doing what has been done for a long time and that is sharing. We did it with tapes and we did it with VHS. They have this assumption that every copy made is a lost sale. Well no, people who will buy will buy it even if they have copies of it. Those that wont buy it wont regardless. I have about 300 pirated movies and I own hundreds of DVDs. I continue to buy DVDs even though I can download the movies. Some of the stuff I downloaded are of movies I own because I am to lazy to rip. Some are ones I wasn't sure I would like and didn't want to spend money on. Many of the ones I am not sure about that I do like eventually gets bought when its in the $10.00 range. Going to war with those that buy the shit is a big mistake because we will just stop buying it. Its not going to turn into more sales. It will turn into no sales.

The only people they should be going after are those making duplicates and selling it to people, profiting off it. Those are lost sales. That is what should be criminal.

The internet provides a entirely new world to make money on. The amount of market they can cover and the speed they can cover is something they could never do physically before. And for next to no costs. Releasing a movie in North America 4 months before Europe will just cause people in Europe to download it instead of waiting. Stuff should be released on physical format, digital format, pay per view and steaming services like netflix and world wide at the exact same time. Those that want to own it will still buy it. Those that want to rent it will still rent it. And those that want to just stream it will stream it.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2012, 08:59 AM
 
Unfortunately, saying the industry "forces people to pirate" is semantically equivalent to saying that the gold industry forces people to rob jewelry stores. There is no actual "need" for the content people want,, so any illegal activity is a conscious choice, not a desperate attempt to maintain survival.

A better point to make is that studios, cable outlets, etc., put together unacceptable bundles of content which is not worthwhile to customers. Pushing for more a la carte content selection is a far better argument because it points out that some content is valued by customers, but not when combined with a lot of other crap.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2012, 10:56 AM
 
Thats really a question of semantics. I would say the unjustifiable greed of the record/movie industries pushes people into piracy. Force is the wrong word.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2012, 01:01 PM
 
But the semantics can point out to those businesses that they are reducing their profits by their poor choices of bundles, distribution systems, etc. The industry is not evil in their own minds, but rather it is run by executives who are "trying to maximize investor returns." If it becomes clear throughout the industry that their ideas about how to get content to customers suck, then they could eventually change on their own - or at least be forced by those investors they claim to be supporting to make changes. This worked quite well in "real" protests, such as those against businesses that supported the Apartheid government of South Africa. Looking that bad in public is just plain bad for business, and so is bundling "100% sports" with tech or kids programming, or continuing the discredited and quite damaging old "advance" system of studio deals with artists.

And there is a case for equating "pricing one's products out of the market" with "promoting piracy" by establishing a lucrative incentive for the pirates. Pricing content is way behind the real market, and neither the MPAA nor the RIAA has figured that out yet. There are lots of people who would willingly pay $12 for a genuine CD or DVD, but balk at the price going up to $16. Market research into pricing, not just "what will demographic X and Y listen to this month" would help everybody.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2012, 02:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
Unfortunately, saying the industry "forces people to pirate" is semantically equivalent to saying that the gold industry forces people to rob jewelry stores. There is no actual "need" for the content people want,, so any illegal activity is a conscious choice, not a desperate attempt to maintain survival.

A better point to make is that studios, cable outlets, etc., put together unacceptable bundles of content which is not worthwhile to customers. Pushing for more a la carte content selection is a far better argument because it points out that some content is valued by customers, but not when combined with a lot of other crap.
When the jewelry industry convinces law makers to create laws that prevent you from given away jewelry to other people, or selling old jewelry to some one else instead of destroying there copy of what they own per a license agreement or starts suing people for forging there own round rings with a diamond in the middle because its a copy then your argument will have merit. Intellectual property is making thought a material item which is not. It is one of the biggest flaws with copyright laws. Copyright in of itself is flawed. And this isn't the first time thought was controlled. Before the invention of the printing press when books where made by hand and only select elite people could read and write knowledge itself was controlled this way via the church. Refer to your history of the dark ages which kept people ignorant. The church waged war on the printing press and educating the common person to read and write. Just because something is illegal does not mean its a good law. It was illegal to collect rain water in Bolivia for a time when corporations took control of the public water system. The corporations wanted to ensure profits on drinking water so had idiot law makers make laws to make drinking and collecting rain water illegal. Guess that was a good law huh.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2012, 06:06 PM
 
You can only give away the same ring one time: people replicate digigtal media on a wholesale level, which does hurt publishers' bottom lines. Copyright is not in and of itself a bad thing, but that one can assert that there is some (yet not clearly or precisely defined) allowable amount of copying beyond which there is a violation AND that such violation is a serious criminal act, that is the problem with copyright.

With printed media, it is not so big a problem to say "you copied the whole story in your critique" because the copier could assert that the work in question was short, that the critique was in-depth, or other such defense. But if one copies a few seconds of a piece of music, the RIAA might assert that such was effectively copying the whole thing and critique or no, it damaged the value of the work...

The media companies are not trying to "control information," they are trying to make sure they make a profit on every copy of a work. Protecting one's property is a valid reason to take legal action. But taking grannies and little kids to court is not a good (nor effective) way to protect anything.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
The Godfather
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2012, 07:31 PM
 
I didn't bother to read the whole thread, but if I loan my personal DVD collection and my neighbors' too among the homes of my subdivision, with a 24hour service, would I be breaking any law?
I won't pay attention to any uninformed answers.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2012, 07:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Godfather View Post
I didn't bother to read the whole thread, but if I loan my personal DVD collection and my neighbors' too among the homes of my subdivision, with a 24hour service, would I be breaking any law?
I won't pay attention to any uninformed answers.
Loan or rent?
     
The Godfather
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2012, 08:19 PM
 
Rent, or loan with a monthly fee.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2012, 08:21 PM
 
Can't speak to US releases but DVDs and going back to VHS tapes in the UK used to come with a warning forbidding unauthorised rent, loan, broadcast or display. Technically it appeared that watching the recording on your own was the only legal way to do it. Even showing a friend was barred, though presumably it was allowed if they owned a copy too.

Amusingly they specified certain locations that you were forbidden to show it in. This list often included schools, churches and oil rigs.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2012, 08:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Godfather View Post
Rent, or loan with a monthly fee.
As Waragainstsleep says:

Read the small print on the DVD itself.

Unless you have licenses that specifically allow rentals, renting them out is unauthorized and prosecutable.
     
Demonhood
Administrator
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Land of the Easily Amused
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 28, 2012, 11:49 PM
 
I don't believe that's necessarily the case. First-sale doctrine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm pretty sure the warning before VHS and DVD copies is mostly a bunch of unenforceable smoke.
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2012, 12:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter View Post
You can only give away the same ring one time: people replicate digigtal media on a wholesale level, which does hurt publishers' bottom lines. But taking grannies and little kids to court is not a good (nor effective) way to protect anything.
The only mistake in all this was the hurting of the publishers bottom line. The only thing that hurts the publishers bottom line are commercial pirates which make near perfect copies packaging and all and sell them for a few bucks that look like the real thing. That hurts the bottom line because its being sold to people that are paying for the product. Downloading a movie off the internet illegally is not hurting any bottom line because the assumption that if it was not available to download then that person would have purchased is bogus. They just would have went with out seeing it. The same demographics buys movies and music today as they did 25 years ago. And with the amount of content that is out there no one could afford to buy everything they wanted to see even those like me who buy a average of 5 movies a month or more.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2012, 12:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Godfather View Post
Rent, or loan with a monthly fee.
Not sure every state and every country has different laws whats allowable. But video stores here buy special copies for rental which are $100.00 a pop for the license to rent them. I would imagine that movie rental places in the US are the same thing.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2012, 06:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by Demonhood View Post
I'm pretty sure the warning before VHS and DVD copies is mostly a bunch of unenforceable smoke.
With the exception of a small number of states in the US, you are correct. They write all kinds of garbage in there to try to scare you.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2012, 06:35 AM
 
The "unauthorized duplication, distribution and broadcast prohibited" bit that's printed on every DVD is quite enforceable, though.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2012, 01:24 PM
 
I really hate the way DVDs now don't let you skip the commercials and trailers. That was one of the awesome things about leaving VHS tapes behind, getting right to the movie.

Disney is especially annoying with their "fast play" option. Doesn't it sound like that option would get you to the main menu quicker? No. That option is the "watch all our commercials" option. I sometimes enjoy trailers, but if I own a movie I don't want to have to watch them every time.

It makes me want to rip and burn new copies so I can get rid of all that.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2012, 03:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
The "unauthorized duplication, distribution and broadcast prohibited" bit that's printed on every DVD is quite enforceable, though.
But not because it says so on the box. If I give you a DVD in a white envelope, you can't copy it without my permission anyway - that's copyright law. By including obviously illegal things in something that looks like a license agreement, they're trying to scare you to give up rights you actually do have.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 29, 2012, 11:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
I really hate the way DVDs now don't let you skip the commercials and trailers. That was one of the awesome things about leaving VHS tapes behind, getting right to the movie.

Disney is especially annoying with their "fast play" option. Doesn't it sound like that option would get you to the main menu quicker? No. That option is the "watch all our commercials" option. I sometimes enjoy trailers, but if I own a movie I don't want to have to watch them every time.

It makes me want to rip and burn new copies so I can get rid of all that.
You can buy players that let you bypass that stuff, they're region-free too.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2012, 05:19 AM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
You can buy players that let you bypass that stuff, they're region-free too.
The requirement to implement regions and ROPs (restricted operations, where the menu button etc is disabled during trailers) is in the CSS license agreement. Any player that doesn't implement these either violates their agreeement or got hold of the code some other way (DeCSS).
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2012, 11:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
The requirement to implement regions and ROPs (restricted operations, where the menu button etc is disabled during trailers) is in the CSS license agreement. Any player that doesn't implement these either violates their agreeement or got hold of the code some other way (DeCSS).
My Oppo BDP-95 doesn't implement them, and it came with warranty and support (very good support, which I've used twice). I've not had an issue playing anything from anywhere. Got it from these guys.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2012, 09:29 AM
 
Not impossible. They may simply implement the DeCSS code while not enabling any more copying than a regular DVD player does, thereby avoiding the circumvention device clause of DMCA. Quite frankly, they may simply be brute force cracking - the key length is short enough to do so these days. Only issue is if there are software patents that are applicable - the standard is 15 years old, so there is some air left there if there was a fairly new patent on a technique included in the standard.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2012, 04:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
I really hate the way DVDs now don't let you skip the commercials and trailers. .
That's why I rip ALL DVDs (with handbrake) and watch them via my AppleTV.
I cancelled my Netflix streaming, and only get the DVDs in teh mail. I rip them, and they get sent back. 1 day turnaround.

Also, now that my ATV2 is jailbroken, and I can watch Hulu - I'm very happy.

-t
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2012, 04:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
I cancelled my Netflix streaming, and only get the DVDs in teh mail. I rip them, and they get sent back. 1 day turnaround.
Criminal!

I did that for a long time too, cept my computer was so damn slow it was easier to rip and burn them to DVDRs instead of converting them.

One thing that annoys me with Hulu Plus is the 'web-only' content. Pretty silly that I pay for a service yet can only view some content on the web instead of on the devices most people watch content on...
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2012, 05:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
I cancelled my Netflix streaming, and only get the DVDs in teh mail. I rip them, and they get sent back. 1 day turnaround.
Probably not the brightest idea to brag about pirating DVDs on a public forum.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
OAW  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2012, 05:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
That's why I rip ALL DVDs (with handbrake) and watch them via my AppleTV.
I cancelled my Netflix streaming, and only get the DVDs in teh mail. I rip them, and they get sent back. 1 day turnaround.

Also, now that my ATV2 is jailbroken, and I can watch Hulu - I'm very happy.

-t
I did this as well for quite some time. Even on DVDs that I purchased on sale for $10 @ Blockbuster. Just to get rid of all the trailers and extras so I could watch the movie already. But I eventually realized that I was building a collection of ripped DVDs that I never used. Like ... ever. And my vision of one day having a library of MP4 files ripped with Handbrake easily accessible on my Apple TV never panned out ... because I long ago moved away from an "always-on" iMac that could house the library to a MacBook Air that simply doesn't have the storage capacity to hold an extensive movie collection. I'm in that demographic that rarely watches a movie more than once anyway so I was engaging in a rather pointless exercise at the end of the day. So I stopped. Now that I think about it .... I don't think I've had reason to buy a blank DVD-R ever since.

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Jan 31, 2012 at 06:48 PM. )
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2012, 05:55 PM
 
I guess I'm in the minority if I have a problem with stealing movies from movie rentals.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2012, 06:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
I rip them, and they get sent back. 1 day turnaround.

-t
When I was home at lunch (or saturday), I could get the mail by noon, rip the movie in around an hour, and return the disc to the mailbox on the street that was picked up at 2:45pm. 0 day turnaround

I dropped snail mail when they doubled the price though, so those days are over
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2012, 06:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
Probably not the brightest idea to brag about pirating DVDs on a public forum.
Frankly, I don't give a shit. It's fair use.

F*ck the DMCA.

-t
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2012, 06:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
It's fair use.

F*ck the DMCA.
That isn't fair use. You're renting a movie then copying it to your computer. That's stealing.

If you were to buy the DVD and then copy it to your computer, that would be an example of fair use.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 31, 2012, 06:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
That isn't fair use. You're renting a movie then copying it to your computer. That's stealing.

If you were to buy the DVD and then copy it to your computer, that would be an example of fair use.
I really fail to see the difference. Really.

And it WAS fair use until the DCMA. Copying the movie is NOT illegal. Still isn't. It's "cracking" the f*cking encryption. That's all bullshit.

-t
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:18 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,