Best Blu-ray Movie Deals

Amazon Prime Day is Now Live »
Prime: Evangelion: 3.33 You Can (… ()

Top deals | New deals  
 All countries United States United Kingdom Canada Germany France Spain Italy Australia Japan
Alien: 6 Film Collection (Blu-ray)
$19.99
20 hrs ago
The Dark Knight Trilogy 4K (Blu-ray)
$44.99
 
Die Hard Collection (Blu-ray)
$14.99
19 hrs ago
Star Trek: Discovery - Season One (Blu-ray)
$19.99
23 hrs ago
The Mel Brooks Collection (Blu-ray)
$19.99
 
Bumblebee (Blu-ray)
$9.96
 
Ingmar Bergman's Cinema (Blu-ray)
$149.99
 
Fast & Furious 8-Movie Collection 4K (Blu-ray)
$54.93
 
The Evil Dead 4K (Blu-ray)
$9.99
20 hrs ago
Lord of War 4K (Blu-ray)
$9.99
20 hrs ago
Top Gun (Blu-ray)
$9.96
1 hr ago
Star Trek 4K (Blu-ray)
$14.99
20 hrs ago
What's your next favorite movie?
Join our movie community to find out


Image from: Life of Pi (2012)

Go Back   Blu-ray Forum > Blu-ray > Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-03-2011, 02:00 AM   #41
ZoetMB ZoetMB is offline
Blu-ray Ninja
 
May 2009
New York
172
27
3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wilky61 View Post
I agree with many of your points, but I'm a bit curious as to why you seem to place so much emphasis on piracy without even mentioning the popularity of audio streaming. Tons of people use Pandora to listen to music at work, on their smartphones, etc.
That could be true but music lovers also used to listen to the radio and there was actually a direct correlation between how much people listened to (music) radio and how much music they purchased. The more they listened, the more they purchased, which is counter-intuitive. Radio used to do a great job of selling records, which is why U.S. radio stations never had to pay performance royalties (although now there is a push for them to do so).

But of course there are some differences. The audio quality of Pandora is pretty superb. And (in my highly personal opinion), the quality of pop music has severely deteriorated. So while I hear a lot of very good music on Pandora and on public radio, I don't feel like I have to own it, because it all seems so disposable and interchangeable whereas back in the 1960s-80s, I can't tell you the number of times I heard a new album on the radio and rushed out the next day to purchase it. If there are lots of people who feel the way I do, then yes, Pandora and other streaming services could be hurting sales. But remember, Pandora is totally legal and they pay royalties to the Sound Exchange (which almost put them out of business). But having said that, Sound Exchange fees paid back to artists are minuscule: in 2009, they amounted to only $155.5 million in the U.S., which was only 2% of industry revenue.


Quote:
Originally Posted by wilky61 View Post
You can go to YouTube and type in pretty much any song and listen to it right there (often with the video, too). You can go to GrooveShark and listen to EVERYTHING and create your own playlists and favorites and library (even though it's streamed from other servers). Sure, these services are funded by advertising, but don't you think this is a significant factor in the reduction of album and single sales?
I'm not familiar with GrooveShark, but at least 50% of the music on YouTube is illegal - all those home made videos of a record spinning on a turntable with the audio track playing or the ones that have a montage of photos of a group are all pirated and I'm surprised that the RIAA (which doesn't seem to have a problem suing grandmothers over a few illegal downloads) and the performance societies (BMI/ASCAP/SESAC) haven't been more aggressive in stopping this on YouTube. All they have to do is issue a "take down" notice.


Quote:
Originally Posted by wilky61 View Post
Now, on the subject of actual Blu-Ray piracy, I will admit that in my college days I pirated hundreds of DVDs and watched so many films I otherwise wouldn't have (buying many of them). However, at least to me, the high-def nature of the Blu-Ray format itself dissuades me from wanting to pirate. It didn't matter five years ago when you could pirate a movie to watch on your 17" laptop screen vs. watching it on your 21" CRT-style television set. But would you really want to watch a lower-quality, pirated version of Days of Heaven or The Thin Red Line as opposed to the Blu-Ray on your big screen TV? I sure don't.
I don't either, but I think we're exceptions (and most people won't pay for the quality of Criterion releases). IMO, most people don't give a damn about quality (people on this Forum excepted). Just the fact that people want to watch videos on their smart phones is proof of that. And the music market certainly proved that the convenience of MP3 outweighed the superior audio quality of CD. I ride the NYC subways and people who use MP3 players or smartphones on the subway listen at mind-blowingly distorted levels. IMO, I don't even think most people know what quality audio is supposed to sound like - they think it's supposed to sound distorted. And they certainly don't know what quality picture quality is - just walk into any mass market electronics dealer showroom - everything is over-bright, high-contrast, over saturated color. The fact is that most people (obviously not those on this Forum) would prefer that kind of PQ to the quality of a Kuro. The average person would think that a Kuro is way too dark.

Furthermore, although the "hi-fi" industry has picked up a little steam of late, very few people are listening on large audio systems. In 1990, component audio (which comprises of receivers, tuners, amps, preamps, processors, soundbars that don't have players built in, speakers and other A/V electronics) did $1.93 billion in factory-level sales. That's $3.242 billion in 2011 dollars. Component sales this year are expected to be around $1.569 billion, only 48% of the 1990 number in equivalent dollar terms.

So, IMO, the vast majority of people don't give a crap about AQ or PQ and while the advent of legal download sites has definitely reduced piracy (at least in the west), there's still lots of it. While it's true that just because something is pirated doesn't mean it would have been purchased if it hadn't been pirated, I think there's no doubt that piracy has helped kill the music market and we can only hope that it doesn't kill the movie market. IMO, the main reason that hasn't happened is that especially on catalog titles, DVD prices are remarkably low. Why pirate a crappy version of a film when you can buy a legit, higher-quality copy for $7 to $10? The other advantage that the movie market has over the music market is that there's no equivalent of the single in the movie market.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 05:37 AM   #42
tilapiah6 tilapiah6 is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
tilapiah6's Avatar
 
Jun 2008
South Dakota
40
284
36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wilky61 View Post
As far as I've seen, DJ Hero was very popular among the druggy crowd, and probably the rest of America ignored it.
You obviously haven't seen very far then. Everybody I know that likes it and owns it is in the military, so definitely not druggies. There is one guy I know who isn't in the military and has it, and he's a 10th degree black belt karate instructor.

Very ignorant and distasteful post, wilky. Save that sort of stuff for your "druggy" friends, and keep the Blu-ray forums clean.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 05:00 PM   #43
martymagicman martymagicman is offline
Active Member
 
martymagicman's Avatar
 
Nov 2009
Cascadia
Default

Question: Wouldn't you need an aweful lot of RAM memoery to copy a Blu Ray? I mean, a regular DVD has only between 4-8 gigs right? As others have said, why in the world would you want an inferior Blu Ray copy? The whole reason to get Blu Ray is because of the quality.

Don't know about you all, but I watch almost all new releases first on regualr DVD then decide if it's "Blu ray worthy". I'm really not wanting a collection of 2,000 Blus, most of which I won't watch again.




Blu collection: 341 and growing.
  Reply With Quote
Thanks given by:
dublinbluray108 (12-28-2014)
Old 03-03-2011, 05:19 PM   #44
BillieCassin BillieCassin is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
BillieCassin's Avatar
 
Nov 2009
159
18
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZoetMB View Post
but at least 50% of the music on YouTube is illegal - all those home made videos of a record spinning on a turntable with the audio track playing or the ones that have a montage of photos of a group are all pirated and I'm surprised that the RIAA (which doesn't seem to have a problem suing grandmothers over a few illegal downloads) and the performance societies (BMI/ASCAP/SESAC) haven't been more aggressive in stopping this on YouTube. All they have to do is issue a "take down" notice.
It's because they (the studio's and record labels) use it as a marketing tool themselves.

If something (a song, TV show, etc.) is on YouTube and hasn't been taken down, it's because they (the owners) don't want to. You are correct, all it takes is an email to the appropriate party at YouTube and it would be taken down instantly, no questions asked.

There is a certain animated TV show from the 80's that appears, in it's entirety, on YouTube. Every episode. But another show from the same company disappears instantly. They have said "no" to the videos of one show, but "yes" to another - one of which is available on DVD and one that is not. Can you guess which one they allow and which they don't?

It's all a game they play for free marketing. Ever try to look up a SNL sketch on YouTube? The best you will find is someone videotaping their TV, and even those are usually taken down. NBC wants you to go to their website to view clips, so they make sure you can't watch them there.

As to the music clips, they have algorhythms that pick those up quite quickly. But why would they? The original copyright holder is getting playtime and exposure that otherwise they would not; copying a YouTube video isn't hard but most people don't know how to do it, and even if they did, the sound quality is usually pretty terrible. So why not let someone promote your music for free?

Those companies are hardly a victim here, they are playing the game themselves. And, let's face it, most of them are at fault for setting the stage for all this happening in the first place. Why does the average person feel OK copying a CD? Because 25 years ago when they introduced them they said "oh these will be cheaper by cassettes in a year" and instead prices have just crept up, and labels for the most part are content with dumping 1 or 2 hits on a CD and filling the rest out with garbage. They pushed until the public fought back, and now we have this back and forth now where they can groom someone for stardom for years and then be overshadowed by some kid who becomes a star because of YouTube (Justin Bieber). The world is changing, but they don't seem to be keeping up very well.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 06:19 PM   #45
Blu-Runner Blu-Runner is offline
Expert Member
 
Blu-Runner's Avatar
 
Aug 2007
81
15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tilapiah6 View Post
You obviously haven't seen very far then. Everybody I know that likes it and owns it is in the military, so definitely not druggies. There is one guy I know who isn't in the military and has it, and he's a 10th degree black belt karate instructor.

Very ignorant and distasteful post, wilky. Save that sort of stuff for your "druggy" friends, and keep the Blu-ray forums clean.
Tilapiah is one of the biggest druggies I've ever seen
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 06:23 PM   #46
tilapiah6 tilapiah6 is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
tilapiah6's Avatar
 
Jun 2008
South Dakota
40
284
36
Default

I'm the exception. We should hang out. You have a gram?

Sent from my HTC Incredible using Tapatalk Pro.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 06:34 PM   #47
Huscheli Huscheli is offline
Active Member
 
Huscheli's Avatar
 
Dec 2010
Switzerland
91
1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DimebagCFH View Post
I despise anyone who pirates movies, games, or music. It is put plain and simply theft. I understand that some people may not have the money to buy actual media, but you can do just as they did before the internet, WAIT!
It's not theft, because theft implies that the seller doesn't have it's product to sell anymore. This is not true for downloading really. It's also not piracy because...well I just download. Which is even legal in my country. Yes, torrents too. (For the time being, anyway).

While I of course want to support the people who create the movies (or CD's) I like, I am also a bit angry at the whole (Blu Ray) industry. Because of several points.
1) They make it really difficult with all that firmware, copy right protection and unnecessary extra stuff that constantly needs updates of your player. That just sucks and shouldn't be. At least in my opinion. It cannot be that you buy an official product for your stupid official player and cannot watch it! It cannot be that I buy a blu ray drive for my PC and have to buy a newer version of player software for 80 bucks because the one delivered with my drive doesn't work properly.
2) Region Codes. It cannot be that the industry is all about "oh no illegal downloads" yet on the other side doesn't want your money. If I can't buy Blu Ray xy because it's Region locked and not avaible in my country (and most likely never will be). I'll download it. Your loss, I don't care, except I would have preferred buying the real deal. And while I sometimes even do buy movies just to put them on my shelf, never to be watched (because I can't lol) I still think I'm crazy for doing this, and that it's just not fair really...

Quote:
Those companies are hardly a victim here, they are playing the game themselves.
There is not much more to add.
I really love my Blu Rays. I bought many of them just because I liked the quality so much and as many, I prefer a "hard copy" with nice package over a digital file in the end. But these points I mentioned above annoy me so much, I really feel as if companies don't even want to get people to buy their stuff because they make it so hard for them...-.-

Last edited by Huscheli; 03-03-2011 at 07:58 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 07:50 PM   #48
ArrestedDevelopment ArrestedDevelopment is offline
Blu-ray Ninja
 
ArrestedDevelopment's Avatar
 
Jul 2009
The O.C.
7
931
33
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DimebagCFH View Post
I despise anyone who pirates movies, games, or music. It is put plain and simply theft. I understand that some people may not have the money to buy actual media, but you can do just as they did before the internet, WAIT!
As an aspiring film maker it makes me livid just to see all this piracy going on all around me, people pour their hearts and souls into making these films, albums, and video games, and they deserve every last penny for doing so. I really wish someone would go Jay and Silent Bob on their asses.
I don't think there's anything wrong if you've paid for the product at some point, whether it be through purchasing the BD, watching the film in theaters or both.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 09:24 PM   #49
kingofgrills kingofgrills is offline
Blu-ray Guru
 
kingofgrills's Avatar
 
Dec 2007
PDX
31
76
31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huscheli View Post
It's not theft, because theft implies that the seller doesn't have it's product to sell anymore. This is not true for downloading really. It's also not piracy because...well I just download. Which is even legal in my country. Yes, torrents too. (For the time being, anyway).
Actually, it is still theft and piracy (unauthorized duplication). Unauthorized distribution is still theft and a violation of international copyright laws. Just because Switzerland is behind the times with regard to copyright laws and intellectual property rights, it still doesn't make it right.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 10:21 PM   #50
FlipperWasIrish FlipperWasIrish is offline
Senior Member
 
FlipperWasIrish's Avatar
 
Jun 2008
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by batman713 View Post
I don't think there's anything wrong if you've paid for the product at some point, whether it be through purchasing the BD, watching the film in theaters or both.
If you really believe your silly (to be polite) justifications, somebody really dropped the ball when they taught you right from wrong. Good luck.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2011, 10:37 PM   #51
frogmort frogmort is offline
Blu-ray Champion
 
frogmort's Avatar
 
Mar 2010
Eastfarthing
47
256
27
Default

When I want a movie bad enough, I buy the blu-ray. I just wouldn't trust the quality of a torrent. You wouldn't know what you were getting until you downloaded it, the video and the audio. And with blu-rays containing almost 50GB of info, it seems like it would take forever. Plus it's just not right.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2011, 01:09 AM   #52
ZoetMB ZoetMB is offline
Blu-ray Ninja
 
May 2009
New York
172
27
3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillieCassin View Post
It's because they (the studio's and record labels) use it as a marketing tool themselves.

If something (a song, TV show, etc.) is on YouTube and hasn't been taken down, it's because they (the owners) don't want to.
No..in most cases it's not the label or studio that put it up. In the case of music, if it's still up, it's because it hasn't been noticed yet or because the label may no longer have the rights to the original or the original rights may be in dispute. (My work involves rights management, so I know what I'm talking about here.) Or, it's because the music labels have stripped down their staffs because business is so bad, no one is paying attention, especially to classic labels that aren't very active anymore like Chess, Motown, Stax, etc. In the case of old singles from independent labels, the tracks were generally "licensed" to the big labels for distribution, but for a limited time. Meanwhile the original label has long been defunct and there might not be clear rights holders, so no one is checking YouTube for violations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillieCassin View Post
There is a certain animated TV show from the 80's that appears, in it's entirety, on YouTube. Every episode. But another show from the same company disappears instantly. They have said "no" to the videos of one show, but "yes" to another - one of which is available on DVD and one that is not. Can you guess which one they allow and which they don't?
What's more likely is that why the show that's on DVD got put on DVD in the first place is because there was a clear rights owner. The reason why the other show never made it to DVD is because there isn't a clear rights owner (or in an extreme case, the show fell into the public domain.) So since there's no clear rights owner, there's no one complaining that it's on YouTube.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillieCassin View Post
It's all a game they play for free marketing.
No. In order for that to work, the free marketing has to lead to a sale that benefits the rights holder. So you give away free movie clips because it leads to someone buying a movie ticket or a DVD or BD or download. But you don't give away the very thing that earns you the revenue. Back in the days when CD sales were strong, there was consideration given to the possibility of giving away singles because it led to album sales. But that wouldn't work today because CD sales are dropping in favor of digital downloads. On a unit basis (counting albums as 1 unit), digital singles (in 2009) were 60.36% of all units, but constituted only 15.69% of revenue. Digital albums were 4.05% of all units, 18.86% of "long form" units, but only 9.82% of revenue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillieCassin View Post
As to the music clips, ...The original copyright holder is getting playtime and exposure that otherwise they would not; ...So why not let someone promote your music for free?
Again, that only works if you have something else to sell. So if you're a band that releases their own music on their own label and you give away singles in order to get people to see your shows, that makes sense. For years, the Grateful Dead had no problem with people making bootlegs of their shows, because it encouraged people to see them live, which is how they made most of their money. But today, when we're back to a singles market, that kind of exposure doesn't work for most artists unless they're primarily a touring band that doesn't sell a lot of records anyway, but that screws the record label and the songwriters, who get zero.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillieCassin View Post
Why does the average person feel OK copying a CD? Because 25 years ago when they introduced them they said "oh these will be cheaper by cassettes in a year" and instead prices have just crept up, and labels for the most part are content with dumping 1 or 2 hits on a CD and filling the rest out with garbage.
There is definitely a perception that music is too expensive, but it's actually not the case at all. (The quality of the music is a different matter). But I never heard anyone claim that CDs should be as inexpensive as cassettes, which were an extremely cruddy format anyway. Here are some examples:
- Back in the 1960s to 1970s, singles listed for $1 and generally had a street price of 64 to 66 cents. 64 cents in 1965 is the equivalent of $4.47 in 2011 dollars. But singles (albeit one-sided singles) sell (as downloads) for $1 to $1.29.

- In 1965, LPs listed for $3.79 (mono), $4.79 (stereo) and $5.79 (gatefold and bigger groups) and regularly sold for $3.25, $3.85 and $4.49 respectively and sold "on sale" for $2.17, $2.77 and $3.37 respectively (at Sam Goody's). That $2.77 "on special sale" price is $19.36 in 2011 dollars. Most hit CDs today sell for $12 to $14 when first released and they generally contain more tracks.

- In 1970, LP prices jumped to $4.98, $5.98 and $6.98 list and sold for about $2.94, $3.44 and $3.94 respectively. That $3.44 is $19.54 in 2011 dollars.

- In 1978, LP prices jumped to $6.98, $7.98 and $8.98 and sold for $4.49, $5.49 and $6.49 respectively. That $5.49 is $18.56 in 2011 dollars.

- When CDs were first released in 1984-1985, they generally sold for at least $20. $20 in 1985 is $40.93 in 2011 dollars.

- The largest music retailer in NYC, J&R, sells backlist titles for as little as $6 online and cheaper in the store. Many of these CDs are part of the rock canon. And many new releases are $10.
Among the titles available online for $6 are:
Aretha Franklin: I Never Loved A Man The Way I Loved You
Otis Redding: Love Songs
Blind Faith: Blind Faith (remastered)
George Benson: Breezin'
Prince: Purple Rain
Traffic: Low Heeled Spark of High Heeled Boys (Remastered + xtra tks)
Ramones: Rocket to Russia (expanded)
Marvin Gaye: What's Going On (bonus tracks)
etc.

Among the titles available for $8 are:
Miles Davis: Kind of Blue
Carole King: Tapestry
Bob Dylan: Highway 61 Revisited
Michael Jackson: BAD (bonus trcks/remaster)
Bruce Springsteen: Darkness on the Edge of Town
Sam Cooke: The Best (Remstered)
Santana: Abraxas (Remastered)
The Byrds: Greatest Hits (Remastered and Expanded)
Blood, Sweat & Tears: Blood, Sweat & Tears (remastered)
Stevie Ray Vaughn: Texas Flood (remastered)

Among the titles available for $9 or $10 are:
Wall of Sound: The Very Best of Phil Spector 1961-1966 (19 tracks)
Be My Baby: The Very Best of the Ronettes (18 tracks)
Michael Jackson: Thriller [Special Edition] [Remaster] (21 tracks including Quincy Jones interviews)
Bob Dylan: Blonde on Blonde [Remaster]

In all, they've got 18,000 CDs priced from $6 to $10. I think that's an incredible bargain (and cheaper than downloading if you want all the tracks.) So it's a myth that music has gotten more expensive. As for the quality of the music, that's a different story and is a chicken and egg situation: did the music get cruddy and so consumers only wanted the hit tracks or did consumers only having the patience for hit singles make the music suck? Back in the late 60s and 70s, when album rock was king, singles were primarily purchased by 12-year-old girls and from an artistic perspective were considered to be insignificant - the album was the important thing (except for some soul acts, until Marvin Gaye and Stevie Wonder started releasing concept albums). I thought the bit on the Oscars where they took movie dialog and turned it into songs using auto-tune told the story about where the record industry is at today, because what they did in that bit is what almost every hit non-rap record sounds like today. Which is why people like me, someone who purchased records for several decades, barely buys any new records today.

Last edited by ZoetMB; 03-04-2011 at 01:31 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2011, 01:02 AM   #53
linkgx1 linkgx1 is offline
Banned
 
Feb 2011
Saint Louis, MO
Send a message via AIM to linkgx1
Default

Reported to the feds. (They see your IP address).

Well, Blu-ray won't fall until Internet Providers up the cap. If they up it to 1TB, then we've got problems. But a 250 gig cap isn't practical. Thought I must say that internet speeds (Comcast is pushing 100mbs) can allow you to download bluray faster...
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2011, 01:04 AM   #54
linkgx1 linkgx1 is offline
Banned
 
Feb 2011
Saint Louis, MO
Send a message via AIM to linkgx1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by batman713 View Post
I don't think there's anything wrong if you've paid for the product at some point, whether it be through purchasing the BD, watching the film in theaters or both.
But if you owned a oil company then would YOU be happy if someone bought gas at some point in their life and didn't again?
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2011, 01:51 AM   #55
ZoetMB ZoetMB is offline
Blu-ray Ninja
 
May 2009
New York
172
27
3
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huscheli View Post
It's not theft, because theft implies that the seller doesn't have it's product to sell anymore. This is not true for downloading really. It's also not piracy because...well I just download. Which is even legal in my country. Yes, torrents too. (For the time being, anyway).
Theft does not just imply that the seller doesn't have its product to sell anymore. Haven't you ever heard of theft of service? If you sneak into a movie theatre to watch a movie without paying, that is clearly an illegal act.

I'm not a lawyer (although I work in the area of content rights), but I doubt very much that unauthorized downloading is legal in Switzerland. Switzerland is a signatory of all five major international copyright agreements: Berne, UCC Geneva, UCC Paris, TRIPS and WCT.

I'd like to know on what basis you think it's legal to download copyrighted content that you haven't paid for. It might be easy. It might be accepted among your friends. But I sincerely doubt that it's legal.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2011, 03:17 AM   #56
krazeyeyez krazeyeyez is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
krazeyeyez's Avatar
 
Dec 2007
the guy on the couch
18
287
4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZoetMB View Post
Theft does not just imply that the seller doesn't have its product to sell anymore. Haven't you ever heard of theft of service? If you sneak into a movie theatre to watch a movie without paying, that is clearly an illegal act.

I'm not a lawyer (although I work in the area of content rights), but I doubt very much that unauthorized downloading is legal in Switzerland. Switzerland is a signatory of all five major international copyright agreements: Berne, UCC Geneva, UCC Paris, TRIPS and WCT.

I'd like to know on what basis you think it's legal to download copyrighted content that you haven't paid for. It might be easy. It might be accepted among your friends. But I sincerely doubt that it's legal.
I saw something not to long ago that a precedent was also set in spain that as long as no profit was made sharing/downloading copyrighted material was perfectly legal. Not sure about other countries but the laws do vary. While i have no interest in this i do not agree with not being able to legally backup the content i purchase. As i understand it the law says i AM allowed to back up my movies, but i cannot break the copyright protection in order to do so. Seems pretty stupid. Personally i wish they would either allow backing up with a program that actually gave me a 1 to 1 copy (i am sure they could do some kind of code or drm to make this possible), or just provide me two discs upon purchase, one as a backup. Would not cost the companies much to do this and would be not much different then the digital copies they currently provide.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2011, 03:54 AM   #57
kdo kdo is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
kdo's Avatar
 
Mar 2010
Realm of the Inoperative Data-Pushers
540
1
Default

All I have to add here is that I hope (for the sake of the format), that public libraries don't end up doing with Blu-ray what they did with CD's and then DVD's... So far, I haven't seen any Blu-ray titles at the libraries I've been in, but if they do start stocking them, it's a sure thing that those who have the desire and ability, will pirate them.

I've always wondered, are libraries required to pay a type of royalty or usage fee for offering CD's and DVD's? I find it strange that anyone with a library card can go and check out any number of hundreds and hundreds of CD's or DVD's, and not pay anything for them, and then take them home and pirate them all. While I personally do not condone piracy, I must admit it doesn't surprise me that most people are easy to dismiss it as being "not a big deal," because if the library carries it, why pay for it?
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2011, 05:28 AM   #58
krazeyeyez krazeyeyez is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
krazeyeyez's Avatar
 
Dec 2007
the guy on the couch
18
287
4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdo View Post
All I have to add here is that I hope (for the sake of the format), that public libraries don't end up doing with Blu-ray what they did with CD's and then DVD's... So far, I haven't seen any Blu-ray titles at the libraries I've been in, but if they do start stocking them, it's a sure thing that those who have the desire and ability, will pirate them.

I've always wondered, are libraries required to pay a type of royalty or usage fee for offering CD's and DVD's? I find it strange that anyone with a library card can go and check out any number of hundreds and hundreds of CD's or DVD's, and not pay anything for them, and then take them home and pirate them all. While I personally do not condone piracy, I must admit it doesn't surprise me that most people are easy to dismiss it as being "not a big deal," because if the library carries it, why pay for it?
Our library was the first in the country to start carrying blu-ray in late 2007 early 2008, remember having to do a double take on the blu-ray.com newsfeed when it mentioned my low rent city. Weird chance, but they now carry an INSANE selection of blu-rays.... i would say ballpark at least a thousand now, and getting more all the time.

Only catch is only the downtown branch has them, but well worth the trip.

found the news update.... https://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=1349

Btw at least from where i am sitting copying dvd's is a pain in the butt, tackling blu-rays a whole other monster, can't see many people hitting up the library to copy blu's. Cd's well that another story, i think the internet is a far worse source for music then people getting cd's from the library, but backing up cd's into my itunes even I can handle Feel like a leper when people see my "store bought' music collection, only know one other person in my social circle who actually pays for his music, thankfully as i can still borrow music from him.

Last edited by krazeyeyez; 03-05-2011 at 05:44 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2011, 06:10 AM   #59
kdo kdo is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
kdo's Avatar
 
Mar 2010
Realm of the Inoperative Data-Pushers
540
1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by krazeyeyez View Post
Btw at least from where i am sitting copying dvd's is a pain in the butt, tackling blu-rays a whole other monster, can't see many people hitting up the library to copy blu's.
I hear where you're coming from . Yeah, I've never copied a DVD (or Blu-ray for that matter) myself, but I know people who can rip a DVD in 5-10 minutes easy. And yes, while copying Blu's isn't as easy, it can still be done.

Plus, my thing with the libraries is that nobody is paying for anything. Granted, like you said, not everyone lives close to their nearest library, but a heck of a lot of people do, and that's a major amount of lost revenue when hundreds and hundreds of people are only viewing the 1 copy the library carries. It's funny, but VHS tapes were never amply available at the libraries when I was a kid. There were a few obscure titles (mostly animated children's movies), but if you wanted to watch a movie, you had to buy it or go to the video store and rent it. Now, it's like the libraries have become a free Blockbuster/Tower Records combo...no wonder Tower went belly-up, and Blockbuster is about to, you simply can't compete with "free."
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2011, 08:53 AM   #60
krazeyeyez krazeyeyez is offline
Blu-ray Samurai
 
krazeyeyez's Avatar
 
Dec 2007
the guy on the couch
18
287
4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kdo View Post
I hear where you're coming from . Yeah, I've never copied a DVD (or Blu-ray for that matter) myself, but I know people who can rip a DVD in 5-10 minutes easy. And yes, while copying Blu's isn't as easy, it can still be done.

Plus, my thing with the libraries is that nobody is paying for anything. Granted, like you said, not everyone lives close to their nearest library, but a heck of a lot of people do, and that's a major amount of lost revenue when hundreds and hundreds of people are only viewing the 1 copy the library carries. It's funny, but VHS tapes were never amply available at the libraries when I was a kid. There were a few obscure titles (mostly animated children's movies), but if you wanted to watch a movie, you had to buy it or go to the video store and rent it. Now, it's like the libraries have become a free Blockbuster/Tower Records combo...no wonder Tower went belly-up, and Blockbuster is about to, you simply can't compete with "free."
Technically its not free, your just paying it out the back end rather then at the register, and it is a sign of the times. Please come and rent a movie, and maybe grab one of these old things with pages and words that old people enjoy . Yeah until blu-ray i never even knew about movies and cd's at the library, i saw the section but never looked as i figured the selection would be limited. Was shocked to find out they apparently have a better selection of movies then anywhere else in town.
  Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Blu-ray Forum > Blu-ray > Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology

Tags
bluray, piracy

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting 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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:16 AM.