[opendtv] Re: Hollywood may demand DRM for larger harddrives
- From: "John Willkie" <JohnWillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 23:22:03 -0700
so, Hollywood is responsible for your downloading a screener instead of
seeing the content in a theater? I suspect you don't have a f*****g iota of
what a screener really is, you are just using that term as well as you use
any term.
Hint: a screener is a copy of a movie that is made available to academy and
guild members for voting at Oscar time. It replaces the "for your
consideration" showings in Hollywierd theaters and the vcr copies that
preceded dvd screeners. In otherwords, these are pristine -- and recently
watermarked -- DVDs that are never intended for commercial release or
redistribution. (Academy and guild members are now routinely kicked out of
their group if one of their screeners gets out.)
In other words, only an idiot -- I'm sure you qualify on this point -- would
call a shitty internet copy a screener. I think you're actually talking
aboutrips from conformance copies with visible time codes.
And, Hollywood is somehow responsible for a consipracy to induce you to
download these things? I should turn you into hollywood for the reward and
the pure fun of it. (second time this year I've used that line, but it's a
keeper.)
You're so dumb that you admit to consipracy to violate copyright laws on a
public email list that is read by Hollywood types ($150,000 per title, you
could be charged) , and you think that Hollywood is a co-conspirator. Geez
...
John Willkie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Barry" <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 4:30 PM
Subject: [opendtv] Re: Hollywood may demand DRM for larger harddrives
>
>
> Silvio Macedo wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Without going into the details of the ongoing mail exchange, I would
> > point out that nothing can be worse than XVid/DivX screeners. Yes -
> > people do actually go into a theatre and tape the movie on a camera -
> > and this sort of, kind of, "movies" get distributed and very much
> > seen by "that" most profitable segment of man-25-to-35 year old.
> >
> Yes. Screeners are some kind of a crime against video nature. (not a
joke)
>
> I can't think of much else that can do more to damage the economic value
> of movie making while at the same time giving very little benefit to the
> public at large.
>
> I downloaded a screener of a recent blockbuster and totally ruined my
> enjoyment of something that I had been looking forward to and that had
> taken a lot of effort creative effort to make.
>
> It would be nice if the Hollywood PR Flacs invented a new word for these
> screener distributors (something better/worse than pirate) and convinced
> us all to separately censor them. This should be a totally separate
> campaign than the usual tirades against file swappers of most other types.
>
> If done right this one might even gain popular support, and somewhat
> succeed, even among "pirates".
>
> - Tom (again, not joking here)
>
>
> > Whatever the DRM technology we pick, pointing a camera to a plasma
> > screen or patching your graphics card DirectX drivers to dump every
> > frame or anything else of the sort, will provide many times the
> > quality of a screener - and hence, will be far more appealing for
> > pirates, and uncontrolled revenue.
> >
> > Watermarking ? - first, few of these users will care, and secondly,
> > there is a huge amount of things you can do to a video to destroy its
> > watermark. In this race, too, pirates will always win - and one cannot
> > continuously distribute firmware to hardware devices for security
> > updates (unless they are networked, of course).
> >
> > My conclusion, as I've said many times, and inline with others that
> > wrote before in this mailing list, is that the solution is: cheaper
> > content, far easier to get ( one click away max or pushed (user
> > profiling)) and a different value chain - in particular, geography can
> > no longer be a factor in distribution - the pressure for distribution
> > is simply too much - and more intrusive advertisements.=20
> >
> > Silvio
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
> >>[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Willkie
> >>Sent: 25 July 2005 16:54
> >>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>Subject: [opendtv] Re: Hollywood may demand DRM for larger
> >
> > harddrives
> >
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>yeah -- another disconnect from reality. Only the extremely poor
> >
> > or
> >
> >>avaracious will watch pirate content over paying for the=20
> >>rights to watch
> >>professional content. Note that DVDs cost less than 2x the cost of
> >
> > in
> >
> >>person admission. When was the last time you ACTUALLY paid=20
> >>money to see an
> >>independent film? Are you an IFC subscriber? I suspect=20
> >>you're just deeply
> >>into cost-avoidance, and figure any content is better than=20
> >>paid content.
> >>=20
> >>It's funny that you bring up the Hollings suggestion -- dead=20
> >>for more than
> >>half a decade -- and call it a Disney move.
> >>=20
> >>You are unlikely to ever get the ability to grant a MS DRM license.
> >>=20
> >>While computers will continue to play unprotected content, my=20
> >>point was that
> >>content can decide what platform is appropriate for being=20
> >>copied to: the
> >>EXACT opposite of what you extracted, yet within what I said,=20
> >>since content
> >>can decide not to care what the platform is.
> >>=20
> >>John Willkie
> >>----- Original Message -----=20
> >>From: "Tom Barry" <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 2:55 PM
> >>Subject: [opendtv] Re: Hollywood may demand DRM for larger
> >
> > harddrives
> >
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>
> >>>
> >>>John Willkie wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>so, you know about hell, too?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>A little bit. But only in the visions of the older
> >
> > Disney/Hollings
> >
> >>>proposals where all computers would be locked such that=20
> >>
> >>they could not
> >>
> >>>play any unprotected content. This is still very unlikely=20
> >>
> >>to come about
> >>
> >>> since the cost to competitive American computing would be=20
> >>
> >>immense and
> >>
> >>>too many folks would squeal vigorously.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>They may not demand, but they can determine the=20
> >>
> >>conditions for their
> >>content
> >>
> >>>>to be stored, once it's in DRM form. A harddrive lacking=20
> >>
> >>a certain key
> >>
> >>>>could be easily prevented from storing content. Many=20
> >>
> >>companies have
> >>been
> >>
> >>>>working on this technology since the middle of the=20
> >>
> >>previous decade.
> >>Much
> >>
> >>>>hype, too. It's turned out to be a MS DRM world.
> >>>>
> >>>>And, Tom, you must have missed several recent=20
> >>
> >>announcements from MS and
> >>
> >>>>Hollywierd. Work continues, and "Longhorn" will be=20
> >>
> >>called "Vista."
> >>What do
> >>
> >>>>you think their talking about viewing?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>The Trusted Computing platforms, or whatever they will be=20
> >>
> >>called next,
> >>
> >>>will still probably allowed unprotected media to play. And if the
> >>>burden to play protected media is too large then people=20
> >>
> >>will probably
> >>
> >>>avoid it. And frankly, if only certain sub-systems and media are
> >>>protected then I could probably live with that. But I don't
> >
> > expect
> >
> >>>Hollywood to accept reasonable compromises yet. For instance, my
> >>>experiences trying to get fully licensed phone-home MS-DRM were
> >>>completely unworkable with the couple of discs I bought.
> >>>
> >>>Meanwhile, there is a hidden assumption that nobody would=20
> >>
> >>have any media
> >>
> >>>to play if Hollywood was not satisfied. I expect the amateur and
> >>>independent movie makers and the pirates all will continue to
> >
> > supply
> >
> >>>whatever the big Hollywood concerns withhold.
> >>>
> >>>- Tom
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>John Willkie
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>----- Original Message -----=20
> >>>>From: "Tom Barry" <trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 4:50 AM
> >>>>Subject: [opendtv] Re: Hollywood may demand DRM for=20
> >>
> >>larger harddrives
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Jeroen Stessen wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>Hollywood may demand DRM for larger harddrives - analyst
> >>>>>
> >>>>>People in Hell want ice water. Hollywood is in no=20
> >>
> >>position to "demand"
> >>
> >>>>>this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>- Tom
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Hello,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>See: http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050720_191403.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>Hollywood may demand DRM for larger harddrives - analyst
> >>>>>>>By Scott Fulton
> >>>>>>>July 20, 2005 - 19:14 EST
> >>>>>>>(...)
> >>>>>>>The moment you become capable of reading and writing movies
> >
> > and
> >
> >>>>>>>transporting that content across borders, Cai said,=20
> >>
> >>"Hollywood can
> >>
> >>>>>>>get really concerned. What if you can carry like 20=20
> >>
> >>movies with you
> >>
> >>>>>>>all the time, and they can't control the content any=20
> >>
> >>more?" It's the
> >>
> >>>>>>>possible crossing of geographic boundaries that's the=20
> >>
> >>problem, Cai
> >>
> >>>>>>>said - a problem that wouldn't crop up if the media=20
> >>
> >>device were made
> >>
> >>>>>>>to sit on your desktop at home, no matter how small it
> >
> > becomes.
> >
> >>>>>>>(...)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Greetings,
> >>>>>>-- Jeroen
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>+-------------------------------+-----------------------------
> >>-------------+
> >>
> >>>>>>| From: Jeroen H. Stessen | E-mail: =20
> >>
> >>Jeroen.Stessen@xxxxxxxxxxx |
> >>
> >>>>>>| Building: SFJ-5.22 Eindhoven | Deptmt.: Philips=20
> >>
> >>Applied Technologies
> >>
> >>>>|
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>| Phone: ++31.40.2732739 | Visiting & mail=20
> >>
> >>address: Glaslaan 2 |
> >>
> >>>>>>| Mobile: ++31.6.44680021 | NL 5616 LW Eindhoven,=20
> >>
> >>the Netherlands
> >>
> >>>>|
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>| Pager: ++31.6.65133818 | Website:
> >>>>
> >>>>http://www.apptech.philips.com/
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>|
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>+-------------------------------+-----------------------------
> >>-------------+
> >>
> >>>>>>
> >>>=20
> >>>
> >>>>>-----------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>-----------
> >>
> >>>>>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user=20
> >>
> >>configuration settings at
> >>
> >>>>FreeLists.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
> >>
> >>with the word
> >>
> >>>>unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>=20
> >>>
> >>>>------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>----------
> >>
> >>>>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user=20
> >>
> >>configuration settings at
> >>
> >>>>FreeLists.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
> >>
> >>with the word
> >>
> >>>>unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>=20
> >>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >>>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >>>>
> >>>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user=20
> >>
> >>configuration settings at
> >>FreeLists.org
> >>
> >>>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
> >>
> >>with the word
> >>unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>=20
> >>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >>>
> >>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration=20
> >>
> >>settings at
> >>FreeLists.org
> >>
> >>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx=20
> >>
> >>with the word
> >>unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >>
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >>
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >>=20
> >>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration=20
> >>settings at FreeLists.org=20
> >>=20
> >>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with=20
> >>the word unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >>=20
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >
> > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
> >
> > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >
> >
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>
> - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
>
> - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
