4K Blu-ray Confirmed, Coming in

[bailey1987]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

that makes no sense what so ever.

SACD and DVD-A passed away a long time ago but CD has not died. The reality is the opposite, if something new and better comes along an people switch to it, that is what kills the older format.

The only thing that killed SA CD and DVD A was lack of content, if they would just day and date the SACD release of an album with it's CD counterpart there would be no problem, that and if singles were released on them.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

I’m not sure why so many of you are focusing on content ownership. Nothing has changed. You didn’t own it on DVD, you don’t own it on BD and you won’t own it on UBD.

The focus should be on the Digital Bridge and its benefits.

because, as a guy that wants to sit down and watch a film I bought, if I can watch the film I bought, that is important.

On the other hand as someone with functioning arms I don't see it as an issue to put in a disk to watch a film, so from that respect there is no benefit to the bridge. On the flip side because of my large collection of films maintaining a server with an array of HDDs large enough to hold all my films is not an appealing thought to me so that is a big negative there. Further more, my experience with cataloguers (film collection DBs like DVD profiler) and multidisc players, have shown me that a well organized physical library is a much more efficient for choosing a film

[Show spoiler] Monday is star wars day and I will watch a New Hope, it is the second case on my fancy packaging shelf and so all I need to do is stretch out my arm while walking to my HT to get it, if it was on a tablet, it might be almost as fast, if it is on my screen I would need to wait for the projector to warm up before I can even start the process. But the real advantage is when there is a large group of people (something that happens several times a year since a small family gathering is around 20) and then with a physical collection one person can be checking out one shelf while the next person can be checking out a different shelf and so each person just picks from their shelf what they are interested in watching and you don't have that large time consuming discussion you get with 20+ people looking at the same handful of titles on screen.

Now if you are interested in using the digital bridge that is OK (and I can understand why others might care), but even then what is there really to talk about? there was DC and then UV and so DB is just useless marketing relabeling of a service that most people never cared about (and why a re-name was needed) and the people that were using the other two are the same people that will use this. Also since there are no facts (except for the new name) there is nothing to actually discuss, if they add an on disk way to automate it (no need for typing in a code) that would be news worthy, but no such facts as to how it is better then DC or UV have been made public, everything so far has been exactly what they said about DC.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by octagon

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. If you're asking how I would feel if I bought a disc and the authentication failed I would probably feel the way I usually feel when a product fails to perform as expected - I would feel frustrated.

Except in this case it will have performed exactly as expected, it is there by design for that exact reason (to stop you from using a film that has no key available on the server. It is the only reason to put the key on the server except for the disk.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

So, you are referring to the AACS 2.0 basic and enhanced. I don't see any sinister intent here. AACS 2.0 enhanced would require a one time on line connection, most likely to provide offers to additional content. Perhaps a Director's cut to be released after the initial release of the UBD.

For discs where all offers, i.e. theatrical cut, director's cut, all extras are on the physical media, no on line authorization/authentication required.

"Three sets of capabilities resident in all UHD
Players
• AACS 1.x – for legacy discs
• AACS 2.0 – multiple choices
• AACS 2.0 (basic) – for discs where the Title Key is delivered
with the disc and an online connection is not required
• AACS 2.0 (enhanced) – for discs where the Title Key is
provided by an online connection
• Title diversity may also supported
• Use Cases
• Disc does not require online connection – Title Keys and Security Module (if provided)
delivered on disc
• Disc requires online connection for first playback, but first playback has occurred and Title
Keys have been downloaded and cached
• List the assets provided on the disc
• MKB and records
• Security module (optional)
• Process –
• Determine what kind of disc (1.x or 2.0)
• Is online connection required (not required, or Title Key already downloaded and cached)
• Process MKB and derive Title Key
• Is there a Security Module on the disc (if yes, load Security Module)"

https://wikileaks.org/sony/docs/05/d..._2014.pptx.pdf

Originally Posted by mackna

yes it is sinister, they want the interconnect to be able to turn off the ability to play the disc when they want

that extra content promise is the same scam that BD-LIVE is

both of you are wrong (if the slides are correct)

If the slides are accurate this is a "one-time" DL so a studio would not be able to stop you from watching the film after the first time it worked by revoking the key from your player. It also has nothing to do with extra content since the only thing that is DLed is a "title key". I think some idiot thought "hey sometimes someone puts the movie on the shelf a day earlier so let's block people from being able to watch the film before the release day." The issue is

1) what happens with an old title (key was available before on the server)that you just bought (but not now when you bought it and want to see it for the first time)

2) what happens when your players memory is full movie X needs to DL its key? will the player delete movie Y's key? and if so ,next time you go to watch Y again it will need to re-DL Y's key again to that same player.

3) what happens when you replace your player or you want to watch it on a different machine (now it needs to DL the key again to that new player)

The issue is not them revocating the key from the player, if they could do that, it would be proper anti-piracy tool. But simply that as it is now any pirated copy could just include the key with it so it is useless for that but any legit user could be denied because the key is no longer available for DL.

[Geoff D]

Somehow I don't think that the authentication keys will take up massive amounts of space. I don't know whether they'll build in local storage on the UHD players as it's not a priority on current decks as most don't have any, and IIRC even Oppo downsized the local storage when changing from the 93/95 to the 103/105. But even if they don't, you can buy USB/SD card storage for peanuts these days, a good 64GB USB stick is about £15 and I should think that would be quite enough for a few thousand keys.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Somehow I don't think that the authentication keys will take up massive amounts of space.

agree but a lot of small stuff add up.

I don't know whether they'll build in local storage on the UHD players as it's not a priority on current decks as most don't have any, and IIRC even Oppo downsized the local storage when changing from the 93/95 to the 103/105. But even if they don't, you can buy USB/SD card storage for peanuts these days, a good 64GB USB stick is about £15 and I should think that would be quite enough for a few thousand keys.

You are assuming a lot of stuff in your post.

1) storage will only be used for keys (which is definitely wrong and the reason regular BD players already have some, they are used for bookmarks.....)

2) all players will have a USB slot for a USB storage device and it can be used for the title keys (none of which are a given)

[Geoff D]

I said that would be enough for a lot of keys as a hypothetical, of course I know that the local storage is used for other things. But, again, bookmarks don't take up huge amount of space, and as for the BD Live stuff on current BD, most people here don't seem to even have their BD players hooked up to the internets so I doubt their local storage is currently overflowing. When I get UHD BD I'll be connecting to the internet for the authentication but that's it, the player's internet connection will be turned off otherwise.

Of all the things that this authentication scheme has going against it, the simple issue of storage space is not one of them IMO.

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Of all the things that this authentication scheme has going against it, the simple issue of storage space is not one of them IMO.

Yep!

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

I said that would be enough for a lot of keys as a hypothetical, of course I know that the local storage is used for other things. But, again, bookmarks don't take up huge amount of space,

But it is all relative. The guy with the biggest BD collection here has nearly 10k BDs, and that means his collection is 10x as big as yours (if both collections are correct, up to date and honest). My collection is no were near as big as his but it is still 2-3x as big as the count under your profile (and I would fall on page 3 while you are on page 47 and there are 1603 pages -i.e. people that entered at least one BD title). Most people don't buy many films, some do.

and as for the BD Live stuff on current BD, most people here don't seem to even have their BD players hooked up to the internets so I doubt their local storage is currently overflowing.

maybe (don't know if it is most but there is definitely some and I am one of them) but that is immaterial and a cop out excuse. If the disk needs the connection for authentication then people won't really have the option. Do you think the guy will be able to time it perfectly so that he DL the key but not the "live" previews?

Of all the things that this authentication scheme has going against it, the simple issue of storage space is not one of them IMO.

agree there are bigger issues (then again you downplay all those other issues just as much), but it still remains an issue and an important one in the conversation that was happening. The guy talked about studios revoking the key, and from the looks of it, I think we both can agree, that can't happen. But if your player deleted the key (or there was a corruption......) and it needs to re-DL the key, if it is no longer on the server you do end up with the situation described by the OP (i.e. you sit down to watch the film and the key is no longer available and you can't watch it.

[rdodolak]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Somehow I don't think that the authentication keys will take up massive amounts of space. I don't know whether they'll build in local storage on the UHD players as it's not a priority on current decks as most don't have any, and IIRC even Oppo downsized the local storage when changing from the 93/95 to the 103/105. But even if they don't, you can buy USB/SD card storage for peanuts these days, a good 64GB USB stick is about £15 and I should think that would be quite enough for a few thousand keys.

With current BD players sometimes the cache needs to be cleared, in order to play a title, because the stored data became corrupted. If you clear the cache do you lose all of your title keys? That's the question that would need to be answered.

Also, I some how don't thing the studios will allow title keys to be stored on a removable USB/flash device. More than likely they would be stored in a non-accessible portion of memory in the player. We have to remember that the studios want to prohibit people from getting access to the title key as this would be required if someone wants to be able to decrypt and rip a disc.

Studios are paranoid about piracy and they'll make it as difficult as possible to give themselves a warm and fuzzy feeling even if it ultimately does nothing to stop piracy and makes the consumers' life more difficult.

[Geoff D]

The issue of clearing the cache is a pertinent one, yep. As for storing it on a removable device, they might do something whereby it formats the drive in a bespoke file system where it can only be read that machine (as with the off-air recordings I can do on my TV). I know there are probably hacker types who can extract the data somehow anyway, but then such determined folks were probably always going to be breaking down the players and reverse engineering them from the start regardless.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

you are right this is much worst. The issue is that you don't get it.

Enlighten me, Obi-wan Kenobi. You're my only hope.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

You are giving up something gng that is yours, your hard earned money, and you can't be sure you will get something in return, being able to watch the film.

I seriously doubt even the most stringent online authentication scheme will keep consumers from ever watching the discs they buy. It might keep them from watching those discs five or ten or thirty years from now but that's a far cry from getting nothing in return for their hard earned money.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

This is the issue that guys like you are missing. I can go to Amazon.com type in VHS and then click movies and it comes back with 400 pages of titles. Do you believe that if VHS had such a scheme and I wanted to buy that VHS movie today that the server would be there to authenticate that VHS copy I bought today?

I completely understand the consumer appeal of transferable lifetime licenses. In fact, I have repeatedly and explicitly expressed my preference for transferable lifetime licenses. I like those kinds of licenses. I like them a lot.

But I don't view them as birth rights.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

What if the guy buys the wrong title from the shelf, he now brings it home and it won't play.

In a case like the guy will do the same things he would do if he got a BD or DVD home and there was no disc in the case or if the disc was faulty or rotted after a year or so - he would go back to the seller and/or manufacturer and say 'hey, wtf, this doesn't work'.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

You don't think you should be able to feel "entitled" to watch the copy of the film you just bought and not just an over priced coaster?

Consumers are entitled to products that perform as sellers promise they will perform. We are not entitled to products that perform exactly the way we want them to perform or for as long and we would like them to perform.

I want discs that will play for as long as I take care of them and there are players to play them but I am not entitled to such discs.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

agree that they can do what they want, but so can we. This is a discussion forum if you have an issue with people discussing stuff maybe you are in the wrong place.

I have no issue with people discussing stuff. I simply disagree with some of the things they were saying.

If you have an issue with that, well, sorry.

[rdodolak]

Originally Posted by octagon

In a case like the guy will do the same things he would do if he got a BD or DVD home and there was no disc in the case or if the disc was faulty or rotted after a year or so - he would go back to the seller and/or manufacturer and say 'hey, wtf, this doesn't work'.

The potential problem I can see with this scenario is that stores will only exchange an item for another copy of the same item rather than a refund. They are paranoid that someone essentially rented the movie for free or ripped a copy and now wants to return it for a full refund.

If the title key is no longer being offered via an online server then exchanging the opened copy for another sealed copy won't do any good. There's the possibility the consumer is now out of their hard earned cash which isn't the consumers fault.

Either there will have to be a paradigm shift in terms of returns or the studios will have to ensure, some how, that not one single copy will be sold once the key is no longer available.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by rdodolak

The potential problem I can see with this scenario is that stores will only exchange an item for another copy of the same item rather than a refund. They are paranoid that someone essentially rented the movie for free or ripped a copy and now wants to return it for a full refund.

If the title key is no longer being offered via an online server then exchanging the opened copy for another sealed copy won't do any good. There's the possibility the consumer is now out of their hard earned cash which isn't the consumers fault.

Either there will have to be a paradigm shift in terms of returns or the studios will have to ensure, some how, that not one single copy will be sold once the key is no longer available.

Sure, any new system is going to have cracks and some completely legitimate consumers who do all their due diligence are going to fall through them. It's one of the reasons so many people - myself most definitely included - don't much care for change.

And I have no quarrel whatsoever with the idea that sellers need to do everything they can to minimize those cracks. People should get what they pay for.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by octagon

Sure, any new system is going to have cracks and some completely legitimate consumers who do all their due diligence are going to fall through them. It's one of the reasons so many people - myself most definitely included - don't much care for change.

And I have no quarrel whatsoever with the idea that sellers need to do everything they can to minimize those cracks. People should get what they pay for.

Oh great, I bought a $40 disc and in five years or even ten... it becomes worthless.

That's exactly what can happen if a studio doesn't keep the authentication key server up and running.

I still have LD discs that work in my old Pioneer player from the early 90's, now you think it's okay for us to get screwed with a disc format that could be unplayable in just a handful of years?

Your faith in the studios is foolish.

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

If UBD fails, it won't matter. You can expect new BD players and BDs to have the same authentication requirements if those leaked proposals are adopted in the final BDA specification. Just hope it remains optional rather than mandatory.

It will never be feasible for a variety of reasons discussed for BD.

Seriously, even if they do impose this with UHD BD, this is going to fuel piracy beyond what they can imagine. The hackers and pirates are going to love this so-called "challenge" and I would expect it to be cracked and worked around in a very, very short period of time.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Your faith in the studios is foolish.

Panicking over something that hasn't happen and probably won't happen is foolish.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Oh great, I bought a $40 disc and in five years or even ten... it becomes worthless.

That's exactly what can happen if a studio doesn't keep the authentication key server up and running.

Yes, I know. That's exactly what we've been discussing for the past several days. Thanks just the same for the recap though.

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

I still have LD discs that work in my old Pioneer player from the early 90's, now you think it's okay for us to get screwed with a disc format that could be unplayable in just a handful of years?

Some people believe being offered anything short of a lifetime license constitutes getting screwed. I'm not one of those people.

I'm sorry, but I'm just not.

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Your faith in the studios is foolish.

I don't know that I've expressed any particular faith in studios. I'm merely acknowledging that they own the movies and we don't.

They don't owe me the chance to buy discs that will last a lifetime. I sincerely hope they'll continue to offer discs that will last a lifetime but if they don't, yes, I will be okay with that.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Panicking over something that hasn't happen and probably won't happen is foolish.

Not being vocal about being against this online authentication (which we know the studios are thinking about) before it gets implemented is foolish IMHO.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Not being vocal about being against this online authentication (which we know the studios are thinking about) before it gets implemented is foolish IMHO.

You're panicking over leaked documents from one studio and rumors.


NOTHING has been announced.