CEPro breaks down Real and Kaleidescape cases, uncovers more questions
By Steven Kim 
posted Aug 20th 2009 11:27PM
posted Aug 20th 2009 11:27PM
It's been a rough week for DVD copying services from Real and Kaleidescape, and public understanding of the whole DVD copying mess hasn't been spared. People like to watch DVDs and lawyers like to get paid, however, so we're willing to bet there's more to come. CEPro has put together a breakdown of the issues at hand, which not only makes for some good reading but also shows just how far from any real clarity we are. Whether it's legal to make bit-for-bit copies, but illegal to view them; legal to use copying tools, but illegal to produce them; or just plain mean to do something Hollywood doesn't want you to, consumers are going to push for media convenience. We're still hoping Blu-ray's Managed Copy gives us enough wiggle room on our HD digital handcuffs, but sadly, it seems like DVD fans can pick between taking up residence in legal limbo while the courts struggle to catch up with tech or just strip the CSS from discs and get on with their lives.
Look - let's get honest here for a minute:
People want DVD copying/ripping software so that they can get movies for cheap by rent/rip/return. Oh sure, we claim that we want to put the DVDs that we own onto a jukebox server (and we DO), but we also want to make copies onto our hard drives in a way that is cheaper than buying the DVD at retail.
Now, a much smaller percentage of people will also take that copy and share it with the world via bittorrent. But most people just want to copy discs that they borrow or rent and will often eventually delete them. It's like a REALLY extended rental :p
The MPAA and the DVD CCA have a really clear stance: Don't rip or copy DVDs...ever. You wanna watch a movie off of a DVD? Put the disc in a drive and play the movie off of the disc. Wanna watch a movie off of your hard drive? Pay for a downloadable or streamable version of the movie from iTunes, Amazon, Vudu, Netflix, etc.
In the end, it's really just about price. All of the people involved in making and selling movies have gotten used to certain price levels and certain margins and they don't want them to shrink...not even a tiny bit. In fact, they fully expect to make more money every single year. And they've been doing just that, for a long long time now.
Consumers are simply saying, "you know what? We don't think movie stars are worth $20 million per movie; we don't think the Studio heads are worth hundreds of millions of dollars a year. We don't think the crap movies you shovel out and write by committee deserve multi-hundred million dollar profits. So maybe you make a little bit less this year. Maybe learn a little humility. Maybe bring a little art back into movies rather than just "sure bet" sequels, remakes and resurrections."
It's all about price and movies just aren't worth $12 at the theater per ticket and $20 on DVD.
With rent/rip/return, we're saying that movies are still a good deal at around $2.50-$4 or so. With Netflix and their successful streaming, we're saying that we're still willing to pay SOME price for movies - it's just that that price is a lower one.
To me, downloading via bittorrent doesn't really have any argument to stand on. You can't expect movies to be free. That truly makes no sense, it isn't fair, and it really does need to stop. But I get WHY people are doing it. It's reactionary. And it's damn hard to compete with free!
But even with bittorrent, people are still paying some price. They are paying for their internet access, they are paying for hard drive space and they are paying with the time it takes to download and possibly convert file formats. There's still a cost involved, so people are essentially still saying that they like movies enough to pay SOME amount.
So I say this - just sell DVDs at the stores - right off the bat - for $4 or $5. Get rid of copy protection altogether and just make MSRP $4 or $5. At that price and without copy protection? Convenience wins! Why rent? Why download even? Used discs would fly around at $1 or $2 and you've basically taken away all incentive to obtain movies illegally.
It's a simple question: which makes you more money? Selling DVDs for $4 or $5? Or having people download movies via bittorrent and pay you $0? For sure, your margins go way down. Maybe even enough that stars have to take a pay cut to $19 million per movie. But just take a look at your friends over in the music industry. Which was better for them? Songs for $1 a piece or $0 for illegal downloads?
It's all about price. So drop the price, remove the copy protection and eliminate the incentive to do anything other than just buy your movies in the first place. Let us put 'em on hard drives for movie jukeboxes and don't worry about illegal file sharing. If it's only costing us $4 to buy the disc in the first place, that's faster and more convenient than searching for a movie and waiting for it to download via bittorrent or you could just sell a downloadable version for $4 and make even more profit! Make it fast, make it cheap, make it easy and convenient and people WILL pay.
Rob,
You have a very big flaw in your argument, potentially a fatal one. It's called Logic. Your argument makes too much sense. And we all know that logic & common sense isn't found in the heads of these overpaid entertainment CEOs.
They live in a bubble world & convince themselves that people would plonk down 20-25 dollars for a DVD & same price for a DRM infested download.
Lowering the price to 4-5 dollars would cut the piracy to almost negligible levels. Most of the people who download now would rather take the easy way out & pay and not pirate.
Rob, your comments are spot-on. I think what you say will eventually happen, though only as a derivative of physical media becoming obsolete. Until then, the "volume vs. margin" panacea will continue to elude studios and I do not see that as changing any time soon.
Enjoyed reading your post btw...unlike most of the "ipod rulz" drivel I usually find in the comments section.
I am so, so glad I now live in Europe and are therefore (largely) beyond the reach of just-plain-dumb US law as it relates to this matter.
I have DVD's, I copy them to any device I want and watch them on any device I want. I don't upload them and if I wish to share a movie with my friends I lend them the disc. None of this is illegal and I'm grateful for that.
All I see happening here is that otherwise law abiding US citizens are being forced to break a (stupid) law so that they can do reasonable things with their stuff.