4K Blu-ray Confirmed, Coming in

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

IMO, what we need is a way to communicate to the BDA our resentment of UHD BD needing internet access in order to play a disc. Most would probably be OK with required internet access in order to use the managed copy feature. P man or anyone else here have access to the BDA?

Although normally reluctant to admit/recognize it (for fear of further enabling it), Board members of the BDA are well aware of the fact that when a person Googles ‘Blu-ray’, what usually comes up at the top of the list is a link to Blu-ray.com and from thence one click later, be the Forum……and thusly, access to the views expressed by its members, who represent the infrastructure of the Blu-ray format.

So, ‘officially’ acknowledged or not, by nature, this site already is the most powerful consumer advocacy group related to matters (yay or nay) involving all things Blu-ray.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

you should see some of the better UHD clips from YouTube (played back via the Sony FMP-X10), they show what the format is capable of and it can be quite spectacular.

Please note, at present the Sony FMP-X10 can not access YouTube. The videos are captured to Win 8.1 and transferred to a USB HDD then connected to the X10. As of now the X10 is DLNA and network shares brain dead .

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

So, ‘officially’ acknowledged or not, by nature, this site already is the most powerful consumer advocacy group related to matters (yay or nay) involving all things Blu-ray.

Too bad they do not represent themselves on this site. Could be fear of being tared and feathered for allowing folks to lockout the menu and skip buttons on BD players. Its like they never thought some of us would buy disc for repeat viewings.

UHD BD titles ought to be required to go straight to the Main Menu with previews being an option!!

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

Too bad they do not represent themselves on this site. Could be fear of being tared and feathered for allowing folks to lockout the menu and skip buttons on BD players. Its like they never thought some of us would buy disc for repeat viewings.

UHD BD titles ought to be required to go straight to the Main Menu with previews being an option!!

Damn skippy!

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Blu-ray Neo

Every single DVD and BD that are in my collection (8,400 total) were ALL legally purchased and are studio pressed discs.

Same here! (though my total is just shy of 1/4 of yours )

I'm not a thief nor am I a pirate, but it really peels my onion to the nub when I, the legitimate consumer is treated like a criminal with this oppressive DRM. If that's the road the Blu-ray 4K decides to take, then that's the choice that they have made and I will make the hard choice of not participating in it.

Exactly! Especially since the actual pirates will find a way to get around any DRM (opressive or not) sooner or later anyway. Sure, try to slow them down, but don't take measures that are overly instrusive for those who otherwise want to pay for your product.

[reanimator]

Pirating UHD-BD seems wildly impractical in the first place. These people already complain when anything is above 720p. 2160p? How long will it take to illegally download a 66GB or 100GB file?

It seems to me 4K is a piracy deterrent by its very nature.

[Opips3]

Originally Posted by reanimator

Pirating UHD-BD seems wildly impractical in the first place. These people already complain when anything is above 720p. 2160p? How long will it take to illegally download a 66GB or 100GB file?

It seems to me 4K is a piracy deterrent by its very nature.

You like avg. people can't afford UHD-BD 4K disc is hardest copy protect againist pirate copy. Pirating use DVD is easy copy and cheap price. It is illegal to copy any dvd or blu-ray a movie. Blu-ray disks are secured with a different security encryption than DVDs.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by reanimator

Pirating UHD-BD seems wildly impractical in the first place. These people already complain when anything is above 720p. 2160p? How long will it take to illegally download a 66GB or 100GB file?

It seems to me 4K is a piracy deterrent by its very nature.

Not long, and when they can get 720p below 800mb for a single movie they can get this blelow 50, quality be damned.
Also as someone who has downloaded fan edits over 50gb all you need is time

[Opips3]

yep, won't help priating copy. why ask who want copy?? long ago time Sony sell BDP with record hard-drive 1000gb is very expensive...i can''t remember much cost $3,000.

[dvdmike]

If someone said "hey here is x film, the actual native 4K dcp, and we are not releasing it on home video for x reason" but it leaks, people wouldn't spend time downloading a 2000s file if that is the only way of seeing it?

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

If someone said "hey here is x film, the actual native 4K dcp, and we are not releasing it on home video for x reason" but it leaks, people wouldn't spend time downloading a 2000s file if that is the only way of seeing it?

If it was the ONLY way to see it? Sure, some might do it.


But the average pirate is probably not necessarily worried about having the absolute best top-notch quality available. My guess is that they probably want things to look reasonably good (to them), while keeping keeping file sizes within a certain limit if they download and save a lot of content.


Ironically the above scenario sounds more like something a certain type of enthusiast - who normally would be more than happy to legitimately pay for content, but is willing to go through "unofficial" channels to obtain content that is simply not available through official ones - would do more than anyone else. They aren't motivated by trying to get around paying for it... they are motivated by trying to simply obtain it by whatever means necessary. And in that case, it's in the best interest of the studios to release it officially so that the people willing to pay for it can actually do so.



Now, I'm not saying that there are no exceptions to this at all. I'm sure some actual pirates (the type who try to avoid paying for stuff) would do this, but most would probably want a happy medium between quality and file size.

[Kirsty_Mc]

Well if this article is true:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27974877

Encryption and hence copy protections days may be numbered. The best way for the studios to counter this would be by offering a quality product that engenders pride of ownership.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Kirsty_Mc

Well if this article is true:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27974877

Encryption and hence copy protections days may be numbered. The best way for the studios to counter this would be by offering a quality product that engenders pride of ownership.

But that makes just too much sense. Never gonna happen.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by richieb1971

If you think about it, before Windows came along in the mainstream piracy on the digital frontier was almost non existent.

that makes no sense. Back in the days of VHS this guy I new used to rent a VHS copy of a movie and before bringing it back he would copy it to one (for himself) or more (for others) tapes. Now it was not digital piracy, but that was only because digital video did not exist back then and there was no well developed internet to distribute it.

[KRW1]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

that makes no sense. Back in the days of VHS this guy I new used to rent a VHS copy of a movie and before bringing it back he would copy it to one (for himself) or more (for others) tapes. Now it was not digital piracy, but that was only because digital video did not exist back then and there was no well developed internet to distribute it.

If I might be allowed to reminisce, when home video first started, our local shop had a display and, if you asked, you'd be allowed to see the videos he had hidden in his box which had all the latest cinema releases.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by spectre08

Last time I checked there was no law against me ripping CDs, DVDs, and blu-rays for my own personal use.

You are mostly right for CD but wrong fro anything else like DVD and BD there is such a law, it is called the DMCA

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/1201

it is illegal to circumvent any copy protection. There are some specific exceptions but none of them are "because I want to"

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I still wouldn't bet against some of it coming true...

Originally Posted by bruceames.

I wouldn't either, although it wouldn't be nearly as draconian as in the April fools article. If online authentication is required, then it would only require a whiff of internet to get the movie started and not a constant connection. Also discs would certainly not be tied to a specific player (if you played it on someone else's player, then you would just need to log in to your account on that player. Much like logging in to Netflix on someone else's device).

One thing is certain: the studios are going to require much stronger protections than what Blu-ray had. I have a hunch that the copy protection negotiations are behind the hold-up in UHD BD right now (Panasonic already delayed their "target" launch to Spring 2016). I think the studios are looking for a disc format with no First Sale protection and that would mean digital on disc. It still would have a great advantage over streaming and downloads since it wouldn't suffer any of the constraints nor delays brought about by bandwidth.

I don't have an issue with better copy protection.

Necessitating an on-line connection would be unacceptable. Not just because I want to be difficult but because that is the best part of physical media.
1) If there is an issue with the internet I can watch a film because I don't need the connection.

2) When I go to my friends cottages (cabins, chalets, lake homes, summer homes.......) I can throw a bunch of disks in my bag and watch them, many of them don't have internet access at those locations.

3) what guarantee is there for the future. If I decide tomorrow to watch an old VHS tape I have, I can, what happens if the day after I buy the disk the studio shuts down or does not own the rights any more?


any authentication would have nothing to do with copy protection and everything to do with information gathering.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

WTF are people talking about this still? It's a rumor, a bad one and I seriously think it would never happen.

I think it was more of an April fool's joke, but there is nothing wrong with an intelligent discussion on the pro's sand con's

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I don't have an issue with better copy protection.

Necessitating an on-line connection would be unacceptable. Not just because I want to be difficult but because that is the best part of physical media.
1) If there is an issue with the internet I can watch a film because I don't need the connection.

2) When I go to my friends cottages (cabins, chalets, lake homes, summer homes.......) I can throw a bunch of disks in my bag and watch them, many of them don't have internet access at those locations.

3) what guarantee is there for the future. If I decide tomorrow to watch an old VHS tape I have, I can, what happens if the day after I buy the disk the studio shuts down or does not own the rights any more?


any authentication would have nothing to do with copy protection and everything to do with information gathering.

Maybe I'm just being paranoid. Sure hope it doesn't come to pass. But I was just thinking from the studio's point of view (or at least trying to, lol) and since they seem to hold all the cards (they have less to gain since most if not all the losses from not releasing on UHD BD would be offset on increased digital revenue), they can pretty much dictate their CP terms.

If worse does come to worst then I would think that all UHD BD sales would also come with a regular BD, so that one could still watch the movie in the boonies where there is no internet.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Blu-ray Neo

Really? Microsoft would disagree with that assessment.


http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/19/x...ames-reversal/


The X-Box One was ready to go with said DRM and all. Only when the gamers threatened a boycott and not buy anything from MS, did they finally relent.



I agree. It's a bad idea, but don't sit there and say that it would never happen.

but doesn't your post kind of contradict that? Like you said, with MS it was more than a rumour, the whole product was designed to work that way and they had to re-invent the xbone at the last second because even though they they thought it could happen, if they launched the device they were thinking of people would have abandoned the platform and that is why it "never happen(ed)". You need many generations of very stupid people for something like that to be acceptable by consumers.