TiVo Community Forum

TiVo Community Forum Archive 2
Covering threads with a last post date between
July 1, 2004 and December 31, 2005.
THIS IS A READ ONLY SITE
 


 

SEARCH  |  ARCHIVE 1 MAIN SITE

 
Forum Jump
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 05-26-2005, 10:12 AM   #31 (Print)
cynthetiq
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgh
Those aren't mutually exclusive. You're both. I'm sure that every thief in the world buys things on occasion.


here's some articles as to exactly how and why....

Quote:
HEADLINE: Web Sites Enable 'Sharing' of TV Shows;
Unauthorized Downloading Portals Pose a Threat to TV Rights-Holders

BYLINE: By Linda Haugsted

BODY:

Most viewers won’t get a chance to revisit the first season of Fox’s 24 until it goes into syndication this fall, but with a few clicks of a mouse, any Web surfer with a high-speed connection can apparently download 24 and dozens of other original programs, via file-sharing software and Web sites.

But to do so, those surfers apparently would be infringing on the copyrights of the owners of 24 and other shows.

Web sites already in operation are making video, including cable-network content, the fastest growing segment in the peer-to-peer download world, according to the Distributed Computing Industry Association.

Could cable TV be the next medium to take a financial hit, in the way the music industry has been zapped financially by the KaZaas of the world?

SAYS 'STOP PAYING’

The intent of these sites seems clear. “Stop paying for cable or DVDs, renting or even going to the movies,” trumpets TV.org (www.tv.org ).

The site, a well-designed, official-looking portal, is marketing primetime broadcast and cable shows by name for download, including CBS’s CSI: Crime Scene Investigation , Home Box Office hit The Sopranos and Sci Fi Channel’s Farscape .

Multichannel News found several of these sites — bearing different names, such as TVunleashed.com and downloadTVnow.com — all of which are very similar in design and verbiage.

A check of domain registrations found that some of the sites were registered anonymously, but at least two come back to the same registrant, MP3 Networks Ltd. in Sliema, Malta.

The sites stress that they’re not selling software (i.e. content). Rather, they say they’re charging for technical support to downloaders.

Membership is not a license, the sites stressed, and downloading is for “educational purposes only.”

A typical hold-harmless warning is: “We do not condone copyright infringement. Any violators must leave the site immediately.”

Another states, “We urge you to respect copyrights,” but also instructs members to “share responsibly.”

The sites boast anywhere from 50 million to 240 million downloaders. In addition to television content, the sites also market movies and video games.

Multichannel News did not register to use the sites, which is necessary to determine their pricing structure for content.

HBO: NO LICENSE

HBO spokesman Jeff Cusson said no Web sites are licensed to distribute the channel’s content. Though such a site could affect sales of DVDs of HBO series and movies, as well as subscription video-on-demand, he said the network has seen no financial impact from such peer-to-peer portals.

He declined to publicly discuss the network’s anti-piracy efforts.

A request for comment from Sci Fi, passed up the corporate ladder to parent NBC Universal Cable, was not returned.

There are some Web sites that offer legal television content. Movie download service Movielink (www.movielink.com ), for instance, offers licensed downloads of BBC and National Geographic Society documentaries.

CinemaNow, which is a partnership of all the major producers except Viacom Inc., (www.cinemanow.com ) sells and rents episodes of classic television shows such as The Andy Griffith Show and past seasons of Big Brother .

Through its PR agency, CinemaNow officials said content companies are very concerned about piracy, but also indicated that the company is not currently involved in efforts to shut down illegal sites or services. The venture fights piracy by providing a legal alternative for content seekers.

Unfortunately for content rights-holders and hardware manufacturers, the consumer-adoption rate for downloaded content is far ahead of that curve — regardless of the legality of that content.

That could be harmful to the development of video-on-demand, since many distributors believe the next-day availability of “water-cooler shows” could launch VOD into the mainstream.

But producers won’t license such content for the platform until it can be delivered and consumed securely.

Content providers were loath to talk about online piracy. But Marty Lafferty, a former executive of Turner Broadcasting System Inc. and now CEO of the Distributed Computing Industry Association, said downloading has enjoyed the fastest consumer-adoption rate since the introduction of instant messaging.

Not surprisingly, the largest demographic group among downloaders and file-sharers is college kids, 18 to 24 years old. The trend is responsible for an estimated 750 million music downloads to date, and the appetite for video is growing.

LIKE BIG-DISH DAYS

Lafferty compared the dilemma of digital rights management to the crisis cable TV faced from home satellite dish customers in the 1970s. All a consumer had to do was buy a massive dish for the yard to receive HBO and all the other satellite-delivered signals available.

“All over the world, analog engineers said, 'This is the end. We can never encrypt this. We’ll have to go back to landlines,’ ” Lafferty recalled. But the rights-holders worked together with companies like General Instrument Corp. and came up with a solution to secure the signals.

Rather than kill the home-satellite segment, encryption led to the development of a robust direct-broadcast satellite industry, Lafferty noted.

The 2-year-old DCIA saw Internet filtering as the most efficient way to protect licensed content.

But Internet-service providers — especially the regional Bell operating companies — want to focus on recouping their investments and want no liability or responsibility for what passes through their pipes, Lafferty said.

The content community needs to agree on a digital-rights management system, such as watermarking or digital fingerprinting, according to Lafferty.

“They need to roll up their sleeves and work together,” he said.


Quote:
Pricey 'Yard' sale
Turner, CBS pay $27 mil for Sandler pic

By John Dempsey
NEW YORK -- The sluggish marketplace for theatrical movies on TV has received a jolt of electricity from the Paramount TV Group, which sold TV rights to "The Longest Yard" to Turner's TBS/TNT and CBS in a shared window for up to $27 million.
Turner and CBS had to move aggressively and buy "Yard" before it opens in theaters (such a purchase is a rare occurrence these days) because other cable networks like USA were eager to get the movie for one big reason: It stars Adam Sandler.

The comic's movies -- even the modest-grossing ones -- are catnip for young adult TV viewers. Sandler junkies flock to USA every time the net schedules such pics as "Big Daddy," "The Waterboy," "Billy Madison" and "Happy Gilmore."

Paramount also sold the rights to "Sahara," the actioner that has grossed $66 million in U.S. theaters, to Turner and ABC for a total license fee that could approach $10 million. A Turner spokeswoman confirmed the TBS/TNT deals for "Yard" and "Sahara" but declined to discuss contractual terms.

Repeat business

The big "Yard" sale mirrors the deals for two previous Sandler hits: Columbia Pictures' "50 First Dates," which fetched up to $20 million from USA and the WB, and "Mr. Deeds," another Col title, which harvested about $20 million from a joint buy by Fox and TBS.

TBS was able to negotiate an extra year -- to five total -- for its exclusive cable window to "Yard." It gets the movie in January 2008 for multiple runs over an eight-month period. CBS then picks it up for a one-year broadcast exclusive during which it will have two runs. TBS gets it back for a few years, with CBS coming in for one final run, with the option of handing off that airing to sister net UPN.

Par had the extra flexibility on "Yard" because its pay TV output deal with sister company Showtime calls for a seven-year window between the first pay run (which begins in May 2006) and the second.

For "Sahara," TNT has bought the usual four-year window, beginning in November 2007. ABC gets a year (starting late in 2008) to air its one run of "Sahara."

Scott Koondel, exec VP of Paramount TV, brokered the "Yard" and "Sahara" deals for Par, and Jonathan Katz, senior VP of program planning and acquisitions for the Turner Entertainment Group, did the honors for TBS and TNT.

Cablers' niche

The purchase of "Yard" continues the aggressive posture of TNT and TBS, which are frequent buyers of big-grossing movies. In the last few months, for example, TBS and TNT have jointly locked up cable exclusives for Warner Bros.' "The Matrix Reloaded," Columbia's "Hitch" and Universal's "Bourne Supremacy."

The major studios received a glimmer of hope earlier this month when NBC restored its Saturday-night movie showcase for 2005-06 after dropping it this season. Also for 2005-06, ABC canceled its narrowly focused "Wonderful World of Disney" Saturday program for a weekly movie.

For most titles, prices have languished; increased demand for theatricals by ABC and NBC could help drive up pricetags.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an ******* or you're not.
cynthetiq is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-26-2005, 10:47 AM   #32 (Print)
jkalnin
Baad Spellor
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Warrington, PA
Posts: 221
Lets put this a different way. I know I am breaking the law, but I don't care. If I want to see Lost and its available, then I am going to download it and watch it. Especially if I tried to Tivo it but it didn't record due to some padding or misc issue.

Lots of you here break laws all the time, probably without even knowing it. I do not distribute or seed torrents or TV shows, so I don't really care about these huge networks that make more money then god.

Heck, without torrents I wouldn't have seen the first ten epsiodes of Lost, and I never would have watched it or purchased the first season DVD. So in a way my breaking the law actually made them money.

__________________
DOH!
jkalnin is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-26-2005, 11:21 AM   #33 (Print)
dgh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 4,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkalnin
I know I am breaking the law, but I don't care.


Maybe not but the forum owner does. In fact that's what the first 6 (of 14) rules are about, so he appears to care if you talk about it here (a lot ).

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkalnin
Lots of you here break laws all the time, probably without even knowing it


If you notice me discussing something illegal here, I would appreciate it if you let me know. However, I suspect that was really just a rationalization.

Last edited by dgh : 05-26-2005 at 11:27 AM.
dgh is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-26-2005, 12:05 PM   #34 (Print)
jkalnin
Baad Spellor
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Warrington, PA
Posts: 221

__________________
DOH!
jkalnin is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-26-2005, 12:19 PM   #35 (Print)
dgh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 4,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkalnin
Really?


I took a quick look and didn't see any, but if you think I've discussed breaking any of those here, then the search function is your friend.
dgh is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-26-2005, 12:37 PM   #36 (Print)
Justin Thyme
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynthetiq article
The 2-year-old DCIA saw Internet filtering as the most efficient way to protect licensed content.
There is fundamental difference between the analog satellite of the 70's and video sharing on the internet. The carriers had control of the transport, including both ends. So the metaphoric appeal to the vision of an industry rolling up its sleaves and uniting to combat a menace is empty headed thinking.

Even if the carriers owned the internet, and could put internet filtering on every routing node in the network, it would not do a darn thing. It would be trivial to encrypt all video packets so each was unique (one private, one public key based on destination IP). How the heck is anyone going to filter for that? All they will see is gibberish.

No. The only way for the content guys to survive is to embrace and extend internet distribution schemes. If they get in before expectations are established, it will not seem heavy handed at all. On the contrary, people will see it as great new features, rather than the co-opted features that candidly speaking, they would very much be.

My bet is that the carriers and content guys will not be dissuaded from this VOD deathride they are on until maybe 10 seconds before they hit the bottom.

Whatever. It's not like the first time that established business models drove companies into brick walls with brilliant automatons at the wheels imobilized by some fantastic vision of how their model would live happily ever after.

Today's fairy tale is VOD and other incremental pay per view schemes.

I have some thoughts on the outcome of your meeting, but the guy is no doubt invested with his scheme. I don't know how many meetings I have been in like that. It is soul sucking and depressing, but by all means not new, and championing of alternate visions is most often not a career enhancing move.

Cyn- If you have a lot of fire in your belly, you could make a go of it, but you would be a mouse among dinosaurs, spending most of your email time dodging dinosaur feet intentionally or unintentionally stomping on you.
Justin Thyme is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-26-2005, 01:45 PM   #37 (Print)
cynthetiq
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Thyme
There is fundamental difference between the analog satellite of the 70's and video sharing on the internet. The carriers had control of the transport, including both ends. So the metaphoric appeal to the vision of an industry rolling up its sleaves and uniting to combat a menace is empty headed thinking.

Even if the carriers owned the internet, and could put internet filtering on every routing node in the network, it would not do a darn thing. It would be trivial to encrypt all video packets so each was unique (one private, one public key based on destination IP). How the heck is anyone going to filter for that? All they will see is gibberish.

No. The only way for the content guys to survive is to embrace and extend internet distribution schemes. If they get in before expectations are established, it will not seem heavy handed at all. On the contrary, people will see it as great new features, rather than the co-opted features that candidly speaking, they would very much be.

My bet is that the carriers and content guys will not be dissuaded from this VOD deathride they are on until maybe 10 seconds before they hit the bottom.

Whatever. It's not like the first time that established business models drove companies into brick walls with brilliant automatons at the wheels imobilized by some fantastic vision of how their model would live happily ever after.

Today's fairy tale is VOD and other incremental pay per view schemes.

I have some thoughts on the outcome of your meeting, but the guy is no doubt invested with his scheme. I don't know how many meetings I have been in like that. It is soul sucking and depressing, but by all means not new, and championing of alternate visions is most often not a career enhancing move.

Cyn- If you have a lot of fire in your belly, you could make a go of it, but you would be a mouse among dinosaurs, spending most of your email time dodging dinosaur feet intentionally or unintentionally stomping on you.


it's really moreso about trying to squeeze out every avenue of revenue possible.

I'm not in that side of the business, I'm in the production and operations area, not distribution, I work with the content creatives and production teams.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an ******* or you're not.
cynthetiq is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-26-2005, 02:28 PM   #38 (Print)
That Don Guy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Benicia, CA
Posts: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkalnin
Makes no sense to me for shows on ABC for example. Lets say I Tivo the LOST finale tonight, and one of you here missed it. So I transfer my show to the PC, then FTP it to you. It has everything the original had, including commercials. Now, how did the copyright holders for ABC or LOST suffer? The only thing that happened was that the person that missed the episode got to see it.


...without commercials (if they choose to) - meanwhile, it's quite possible that the reason the person missed it was because they were watching a show (and its commercials) on another channel at the same time. "Why should I advertise on 'Lost' if nobody is going to watch the commercials?" You were saying something about nobody suffering?
("But I could skip the commercials with my TiVo as well, if I wanted to" - and you pay for the privilege (either $13 a month or $250 all at once).)
Also, if you can do it with one episode, you can do it with all of them (ask the owners of the copyrights/trademarks on Monopoly and the Oscar statue what happens when you let "one too many" violations pass); this would certainly affect any potential video sales.

As for some sort of watermark to prevent a show recorded on one box to be played back on another, I smell the handiwork of NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue. (Apparently, TiVo2Go makes it too easy to record a game and send it digitally to somebody who lives in the home team's city where the game is blacked out, and never mind that there really isn't much of a market for watching football games that are already over.)

-- Don
That Don Guy is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-26-2005, 02:37 PM   #39 (Print)
Justin Thyme
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynthetiq
it's really moreso about trying to squeeze out every avenue of revenue possible.
Yeah, it would be the right thing to do if their weren't barbarians at the gate. It's like Encyclopedia Brittanica fiddling around with their door to door saleman incentives while Microsoft is telling everyone they are going to sell their encyclopedia for under $100. I won't belabor the point I made earlier.

The leadership are asleep at the wheel as can be expected, and the brighter middle managers are at best in denial or fatalistic about being able to single handedly change the course of their massive organizations careening towards the icebergs
Justin Thyme is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-26-2005, 02:44 PM   #40 (Print)
cynthetiq
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Thyme
Yeah, it would be the right thing to do if their weren't barbarians at the gate. It's like Encyclopedia Brittanica fiddling around with their door to door saleman incentives while Microsoft is telling everyone they are going to sell their encyclopedia for under $100. I won't belabor the point I made earlier.

The leadership are asleep at the wheel as can be expected, and the brighter middle managers are at best in denial or fatalistic about being able to single handedly change the course of their massive organizations careening towards the icebergs


i can't say that the leadership is asleep at the wheel. i've worked closely with one of them for close to 10 years and he is very visionary, but at the same time quite practical at profitable TV production. In fact our company has for the time that I've been here easily been able to spend $1 and get back $2 consistently, and then the licensing tie ins... I can't even begin to fathom that revenue stream since it really dwarfs the production revenues.

We're even looking at acquiring UCC (User Created Content) since it's zero production costs, just acquisition, and we're good at acquisitions too

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an ******* or you're not.
cynthetiq is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-26-2005, 06:20 PM   #41 (Print)
Justin Thyme
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynthetiq
i can't say that the leadership is asleep at the wheel. i've worked closely with one of them for close to 10 years and he is very visionary, but at the same time quite practical at profitable TV production....
Exactly. Don't fix it if it isn't broken and all that. Brittanica went from a banner year of $650 million in sales to being sold off at 1/2 book value 6 short years later. The were told exactly what was going to happen by their own technical people, and they walked off the cliff with their eyes wide open.

But I'm not saying that everything is going to change overnight. The rare times when the conservative approach of waiting to see if wildly fantastic threats really materialze, is in the cases where there is too little time to react. And that does not appear to be the case here since the doomsday scenario would have a real hard time happenning overnight. Data bottlenecks on the internet will retard sudden progress. Internet content produced by amateurs, Bollywood & other international independent's may theoretically have the ability to distribute low cost material sufficiently imitative or interesting to US audiences that they could poach market share away from the US content industry. But that will drive bandwidth into the toilet- with the immediate effect that people decide that internet transfers are years away from being practical. So then there is time to counter- you just acquire rights to the creme of it, right, then distribute it more efficiently through more conventional channels.

You can buy a lot of time.

Meanwhile, sites like EliteTorrents.org will be shut down and their web pages substituted with ominous messages like the following:

Quote:
Originally Posted by FBI
It is unlawful to reproduce or distribute copyrighted material, such as movies, music,
software or games, without authorization - even when done for free over the Internet.
Individuals who willfully distribute or download copyrighted material risk criminal
prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 2319. First-time offenders convicted of criminal felony
copyright laws will face up to five years in federal prison, restitution, forfeiture and a fine
.

Last edited by Justin Thyme : 05-26-2005 at 06:32 PM.
Justin Thyme is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-26-2005, 10:55 PM   #42 (Print)
FlWingNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Lake Mary, FL
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigg
Basically, if a peice of work is priated on a large scale (Episode 3 50-100K downloaders or more) that means whoever is making the movie is not releasing it in way that is desireable to their customer. If LucasFilm wanted to not have pirating, Episode 3 should have been available on DVD and on Movielink on the release day. I can guarantee that if they had it legally available on realease day, people would not have pirated the low qualtiy workprint that they did.


Huh? So your attitude is basically "give it to me when I want it, for the price I want, in the format I want or I'll steal it." Is that it? Why would a brand new blockbuster be available on Movielink and/or on DVD the day it opens in theaters? What kind of business model is that? That kills both the current box office and later DVD and broadcast income. But besides that, it's the general attitude of "give it to me or I'll swipe it," that saddens me. What kind of people are we?
FlWingNut is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-26-2005, 11:53 PM   #43 (Print)
Stormspace
Disruptive Influence
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 897
Send a message via AIM to Stormspace
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlWingNut
Huh? So your attitude is basically "give it to me when I want it, for the price I want, in the format I want or I'll steal it." Is that it? Why would a brand new blockbuster be available on Movielink and/or on DVD the day it opens in theaters? What kind of business model is that? That kills both the current box office and later DVD and broadcast income. But besides that, it's the general attitude of "give it to me or I'll swipe it," that saddens me. What kind of people are we?


The real problem here is that the studios are finally catching up with the rest of the world and in order to protect a future market and cash cow they are trying to supress things they let slide in the past in the interest of trying to make money. Before offering VOD there was no "lost" revenue on things DLed for personal use, but once VOD came along they all of a sudden have to protect that market. Same for TV show reruns and season DVD's. So what happens is that consumer behavior has to be changed and they can't say "we thought it was OK before cuz we weren't losing potential sales." so they say instead that they are taking a new initiative against pirates. They try to demonize their customers and cast them into a bad light while at the same time relying on these very same people to sustain their profits.

What's going to happen is that some of the people they are suing will one day be in a position of authority and remember how they comported themselves with their customers and that's when the tide will turn against them because right now there are a bunch of sheeple pointing fingers along with the RIAA and MPAA saying "that's right, you're a thief".

__________________
180hr Series 2
w/Blitzz BWU613 NetWave Point USB
80hr Series 2
w/linksys WUSB11 USB Adapter
Galleon 2.1 on 260GB WIN2000

"No daddy, it's a 181 hour tivo" - Margaret
Stormspace is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 09:22 AM   #44 (Print)
BobCamp1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlWingNut
Huh? So your attitude is basically "give it to me when I want it, for the price I want, in the format I want or I'll steal it." Is that it? Why would a brand new blockbuster be available on Movielink and/or on DVD the day it opens in theaters? What kind of business model is that? That kills both the current box office and later DVD and broadcast income. But besides that, it's the general attitude of "give it to me or I'll swipe it," that saddens me. What kind of people are we?



We are the kind of people that drive slightly over the speed limit all the time, which is illegal. However, speeding is not nearly as illegal as killing somebody, which makes it OK to do.

We conveniently ignore the fact that speed limits are there to reduce the chance of you killing someone with your car. Besides, if everybody does it, and we personally haven't been in a high speed wreck, we must not be driving too fast. Plus, we don't drive fast all the time, just once in a while when we really need to.
BobCamp1 is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 09:43 AM   #45 (Print)
cynthetiq
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Thyme
Exactly. Don't fix it if it isn't broken and all that. Brittanica went from a banner year of $650 million in sales to being sold off at 1/2 book value 6 short years later. The were told exactly what was going to happen by their own technical people, and they walked off the cliff with their eyes wide open.

But I'm not saying that everything is going to change overnight. The rare times when the conservative approach of waiting to see if wildly fantastic threats really materialze, is in the cases where there is too little time to react. And that does not appear to be the case here since the doomsday scenario would have a real hard time happenning overnight. Data bottlenecks on the internet will retard sudden progress. Internet content produced by amateurs, Bollywood & other international independent's may theoretically have the ability to distribute low cost material sufficiently imitative or interesting to US audiences that they could poach market share away from the US content industry. But that will drive bandwidth into the toilet- with the immediate effect that people decide that internet transfers are years away from being practical. So then there is time to counter- you just acquire rights to the creme of it, right, then distribute it more efficiently through more conventional channels.

You can buy a lot of time.

Meanwhile, sites like EliteTorrents.org will be shut down and their web pages substituted with ominous messages like the following:



You can say similar parallels exist with Eastman Kodak. Family worked there from 80-00, and I followed that company closely growing up. I watched the digital camera market bite them in the ass, family owned stock plummeted to worthlessness. Many years of them losing their core business, but in just a few short years, they have arisen out of those ashes and are again back to profitability and people are again equating Kodak with camera/picture technology.

Leadership has to be responsible enough to respond to the market, respond to shareholders, and also their employee base.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an ******* or you're not.
cynthetiq is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 09:57 AM   #46 (Print)
FlWingNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Lake Mary, FL
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormspace
The real problem here is that the studios are finally catching up with the rest of the world and in order to protect a future market and cash cow they are trying to supress things they let slide in the past in the interest of trying to make money. Before offering VOD there was no "lost" revenue on things DLed for personal use, but once VOD came along they all of a sudden have to protect that market. Same for TV show reruns and season DVD's. So what happens is that consumer behavior has to be changed and they can't say "we thought it was OK before cuz we weren't losing potential sales." so they say instead that they are taking a new initiative against pirates. They try to demonize their customers and cast them into a bad light while at the same time relying on these very same people to sustain their profits.

What's going to happen is that some of the people they are suing will one day be in a position of authority and remember how they comported themselves with their customers and that's when the tide will turn against them because right now there are a bunch of sheeple pointing fingers along with the RIAA and MPAA saying "that's right, you're a thief".


Maybe, but the point is, the content belongs to the content producer and can be distrubuted as he/she sees fit. If they choose not to "catch up" with the rest of the world and release things the way some of us would choose, that does not give others a right to force it on them by stealing it. The attitude of "if you'd just given it to me I wouldn't have had to take it," bothers me. We're talking about TV and movies, not bread or water. If you want to see Episode Three, spend five bucks on a weekday matinee, grab some popcorn and plop your butt in a seat at the theater. Then later, when it's released on DVD, buy it legally, if you want to own it, or wait and tape (or Tivo) it off TV (legal for personal use) and watch it to your heart's content. But don't buy some crappy, illegal copy off the internet and rationalize it by saying "it's Lucas' fault because he didn't release it on DVD on opening night."
FlWingNut is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 10:09 AM   #47 (Print)
FlWingNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Lake Mary, FL
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobCamp1
We are the kind of people that drive slightly over the speed limit all the time, which is illegal. However, speeding is not nearly as illegal as killing somebody, which makes it OK to do.

We conveniently ignore the fact that speed limits are there to reduce the chance of you killing someone with your car. Besides, if everybody does it, and we personally haven't been in a high speed wreck, we must not be driving too fast. Plus, we don't drive fast all the time, just once in a while when we really need to.


I'm not sure the analogy applies here. If your point is that we all break laws from time to time, well, of course. But different laws are enforced differently with different penalties because not all laws are equally important. There is a difference between jaywalking and murder, no? We don't execute jaywalkers -- yet

If I speed and don't get into an accident, I've hurt no one. And there is a difference between doing 65 in a 55, and doing 90 in a 45. That's why you may get a warning, in the first scenario, and most likely will get a ticket in the second. If I do get in an accident and it's found I was speeding (or tailgaiting, or making an illegal turn -- whatever), there are penalities for that. If I go online, buy an illegal copy of a movie that's not even out yet, instead of going to the theater, I've hurt economically the producers, artists, theater owners, the kid selling (overpriced) popcorn, and so on. I've also hurt the prodcuer, artists and retail outlets when the legal DVD comes out and I don't buy it, because I have a pirated copy. And this damage is multiplied if I make more copies from my copy and sell (or even give) them away.
FlWingNut is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 10:12 AM   #48 (Print)
Stormspace
Disruptive Influence
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 897
Send a message via AIM to Stormspace
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlWingNut
Maybe, but the point is, the content belongs to the content producer and can be distrubuted as he/she sees fit. If they choose not to "catch up" with the rest of the world and release things the way some of us would choose, that does not give others a right to force it on them by stealing it. The attitude of "if you'd just given it to me I wouldn't have had to take it," bothers me. We're talking about TV and movies, not bread or water. If you want to see Episode Three, spend five bucks on a weekday matinee, grab some popcorn and plop your butt in a seat at the theater. Then later, when it's released on DVD, buy it legally, if you want to own it, or wait and tape (or Tivo) it off TV (legal for personal use) and watch it to your heart's content. But don't buy some crappy, illegal copy off the internet and rationalize it by saying "it's Lucas' fault because he didn't release it on DVD on opening night."


LOL! Most of what you said I agree with. I've never felt comfortable with DL'ed movies and even when I have gotten my hands on one, via sneakernet from a friend that didn't ask if I wanted it, but just sent it on over anyway I've felt somewhat bad about it. My main issue is with the distribution of TV shows.

TV shows are ad supported. Their production budget is determined by how much money a network will offer them for the show. And in order to make a show great they have to have buzz about it so that people want to watch, thus more eyes on the commercials. Or so the theory goes.

So, what is bad about DLing a show on the internet that is ad supported. Sure you are infringing, but you are also adding to the buzz that the show creates. You talk the show up and make others want to watch. "Did you see smallville last night?"

For my own part, I DL if I missed the show due to technical issues (Cable/Power outtage, Unexpected conflict, etc.) as I'd rather not wait for the rerun. DVD season's have just recently started to be offered and honestly this is just icing on the cake for them. They have already been paid for the work. The season DVD's in my opinion aren't marketed to people who missed the prior seasons, but to people who like the show and want to own a copy. People who are just trying to catch up should be left alone.

__________________
180hr Series 2
w/Blitzz BWU613 NetWave Point USB
80hr Series 2
w/linksys WUSB11 USB Adapter
Galleon 2.1 on 260GB WIN2000

"No daddy, it's a 181 hour tivo" - Margaret
Stormspace is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 10:28 AM   #49 (Print)
ZeoTiVo
fantastic four TiVos
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormspace
The real problem here is that the studios are finally catching up with the rest of the world and in order to protect a future market and cash cow they are trying to supress things they let slide in the past in the interest of trying to make money. Before offering VOD there was no "lost" revenue on things DLed for personal use, but once VOD came along they all of a sudden have to protect that market. Same for TV show reruns and season DVD's. So what happens is that consumer behavior has to be changed and they can't say "we thought it was OK before cuz we weren't losing potential sales." so they say instead that they are taking a new initiative against pirates. They try to demonize their customers and cast them into a bad light while at the same time relying on these very same people to sustain their profits.

What's going to happen is that some of the people they are suing will one day be in a position of authority and remember how they comported themselves with their customers and that's when the tide will turn against them because right now there are a bunch of sheeple pointing fingers along with the RIAA and MPAA saying "that's right, you're a thief".


It was always illegal , individuals just assumed it was their right to make a copy and hand it off to a friend - I know I have done this and most likely will again. Now is there any kind of buisness sense in regards to Return on Invetsment on money spent going after me for such a small time crime.
now even after reading this whole thread , it still amuses me that everyone equates this small time chump change exchange of a show to something like bit torrent or if TiVo let you get shows without DRM on them and automate the whole seeding of bit torrent with their great shceduling of recordings interface.
These are just different things from a business perspective. How should the business though be charged with making a whole rack of shows available for download without being able to build up a business model around tiers and pricing and also the mechanics of how to do it effeciently and at least cost.
This is not just a quickie business meeting of "hey, lets put the shows on the FTP server" The business knows they will need to get there, TiVo has shown they know they need to get there as evidenced by the talks with Netflix and early HME apps for Best Buy music palyable on the TiVo.

but this is not a this year kind of project and expect more bit torrent lawsuits as the Music Industry proved them a successful tool to take music sharing back down to the level of a fringe doing it with some work involved VS the go to Napster and download an easy client interface for the mainstream mass market.

there is no customer right to simply copy/download a show outside the copyright conventions. This is not sheep pointing but just a reality check on the fact of the matter.
ZeoTiVo is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 10:43 AM   #50 (Print)
dgh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 4,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormspace
TV shows are ad supported. Their production budget is determined by how much money a network will offer them for the show. And in order to make a show great they have to have buzz about it so that people want to watch, thus more eyes on the commercials. Or so the theory goes.

So, what is bad about DLing a show on the internet that is ad supported.


It seems pretty obvious that if the content owner agreed with you, then he would be encouraging downloading. I suppose it could be because he knows less about his business than you do, but I think it's more likely that it's because he knows more. Bottom line, is that most people (including IP holders) are in a better position to determine their own best interests than strangers.

And if they really are wrong after all? We'll people have the right to make mistakes too. If he keeps making the same mistake, he'll go out of business and be replaced by someone who gets it right.
dgh is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 10:48 AM   #51 (Print)
Stormspace
Disruptive Influence
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 897
Send a message via AIM to Stormspace
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgh
It seems pretty obvious that if the content owner agreed with you, then he would be encouraging downloading. I suppose it could be because he knows less about his business than you do, but I think it's more likely that it's because he knows more. Bottom line, is that most people (including IP holders) are in a better position to determine their own best interests than strangers.

And if they really are wrong after all? We'll people have the right to make mistakes too. If he keeps making the same mistake, he'll go out of business and be replaced by someone who gets it right.


To me the whole thing seems to be an effort of futility as the media conglomerates hold a great deal of power and influence that the little man can rarely fight. To say that they will go out of business is short sighted and naive given the broad spectrum of influence media companies have due in no small part to the monopolies they have.

Fair use IS being trappled into the dirt and it is truly unfortunate when people can't see that.

__________________
180hr Series 2
w/Blitzz BWU613 NetWave Point USB
80hr Series 2
w/linksys WUSB11 USB Adapter
Galleon 2.1 on 260GB WIN2000

"No daddy, it's a 181 hour tivo" - Margaret
Stormspace is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 10:59 AM   #52 (Print)
cynthetiq
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgh
It seems pretty obvious that if the content owner agreed with you, then he would be encouraging downloading. I suppose it could be because he knows less about his business than you do, but I think it's more likely that it's because he knows more. Bottom line, is that most people (including IP holders) are in a better position to determine their own best interests than strangers.

And if they really are wrong after all? We'll people have the right to make mistakes too. If he keeps making the same mistake, he'll go out of business and be replaced by someone who gets it right.


correct there's plenty of examples of the split in the music industry...

even the video people like Trey Parker and Matt Stone split from the rest of the industry, they think it's great that people d/l South Park.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an ******* or you're not.
cynthetiq is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 11:29 AM   #53 (Print)
Justin Thyme
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynthetiq
You can say similar parallels exist with Eastman Kodak.
Yes, but it is an example of a more healthy attitude towards intrapreneurship. The first excellent point and click 1Megapixel digital camera was a Kodak- not a Canon, Fuji, or Olympus. I bought one back then and relied on it for a year.

The demise of the film portion of their business was going to be painful regardless whether they stepped perfectly into the digital world. They did have bright guys leading the way with the camera, but they did have misteps- It was a huge mistake not to be better prepared at the photofinishing side. Those early Fuji digital photofinishing machines produced the best quality- if Kodak was stepping perfectly, they all would have been Kodaks.

The motto I like is Duponts- "If anyone is going to put a Dupont business unit out of business, it better darn well be another Dupont business unit". That can create an ummm rather lively corporate environment- an environment that I don't miss. But there is glory in fighting the good fight, and on the off chance that you win, tremendous financial and career rewards. I'm kind of like Birdman in the Movie "Flash Gordon" asking "Who wants to live forever?" and charge into battle.

As a "research" project, maybe you can find some back catalog material that isn't going to make any money anyway. Then it might be fun to have a chat with a Tivo execs at whatever conferences or public events they show up at. You know, don't be timid- act like you own the place, present your credentials informally, and do a totally oral thing without any witnesses so they are free to talk. I found that sending a random email was a ticket to oblivion- Personal contact very effective- they could size you up quickly and determine if they felt you are real- that you are not just a dreamer but a player with resources that you have the power to commit. Tell them you want to some sort of scheme that leverages the Tivo network of servers. Who knows- maybe they are thinking along the same lines for a proof of concept trial and are looking for a content partner. But there is no point in talking to a middle level person with no power or a high level guy on the way out, or not in charge of resources that can execute the project.

What I found was that 90% of the problem was figuring out who the key person was to talk to. Not that I had a great deal of success. I only learned it towards the end. Also that you must talk to the real players in an environment where they can speak freely. Maybe that mirrors what your family found in the Kodak internal wars which I can imagine were fierce between the chemical versus digital folks. They probably also found the wisdom of Eisenhower's statement that it is amazing what is possible if you make the other person think it is their brilliant idea, and don't attempt to take any credit for anything. I think Colin Powell said something like that too. Can't remember his exact words.

Whatever you do, you are in a great position to watch a lot of fireworks in the coming years. At the very least keep a journal of what people said exactly. It's hard to tell what the key decisions, or the most telling remarks were until much later. I think that american management needs to learn more about how it deals with this technology wave problem, and it would be useful to have more data on how decisions were made to analyze what really happenned. A lot of the material out there is self serving kiss and tell stuff.

I know this sounds like big talk in a very unlikely forum, but you know, who the heck cares. I'm just a retired fart that spends most of his time taking care of his babies. I have a lot of time to think and I type fast in long notes that no one reads. I don't really care what you do either way, or whether you believe I know what I am talking about.

It doesn't matter you are in the production side- folks on the distribution side are in all likelihood so invested with their current models that no way would they risk such experiments. Maybe it would have to be someone outside of distribution. So it doesn't cost anything for you to reach out to Tivo management in an informal setting and see if something can fly between your organization and Tivo's. At the very least, they can gain some insight into the thinking inside content companies.

Last edited by Justin Thyme : 05-27-2005 at 12:10 PM.
Justin Thyme is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 11:40 AM   #54 (Print)
dgh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 4,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormspace
To me the whole thing seems to be an effort of futility as the media conglomerates hold a great deal of power and influence that the little man can rarely fight. To say that they will go out of business is short sighted and naive given the broad spectrum of influence media companies have due in no small part to the monopolies they have.


Power and influence? You're talking about TV shows. If you don't like the way they're packaged and delivered, don't watch em.
dgh is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 12:08 PM   #55 (Print)
Stormspace
Disruptive Influence
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 897
Send a message via AIM to Stormspace
Quote:
Originally Posted by dgh
Power and influence? You're talking about TV shows. If you don't like the way they're packaged and delivered, don't watch em.


I don't live in an all or nothing world and can seek compromise.

__________________
180hr Series 2
w/Blitzz BWU613 NetWave Point USB
80hr Series 2
w/linksys WUSB11 USB Adapter
Galleon 2.1 on 260GB WIN2000

"No daddy, it's a 181 hour tivo" - Margaret
Stormspace is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 12:25 PM   #56 (Print)
dgh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 4,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormspace
I don't live in an all or nothing world and can seek compromise.


There's no all or nothing about this world. You have way more choices in entertainment then you will ever have time to consume.
dgh is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 12:48 PM   #57 (Print)
FlWingNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Lake Mary, FL
Posts: 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormspace
LOL! Most of what you said I agree with. I've never felt comfortable with DL'ed movies and even when I have gotten my hands on one, via sneakernet from a friend that didn't ask if I wanted it, but just sent it on over anyway I've felt somewhat bad about it. My main issue is with the distribution of TV shows.

TV shows are ad supported. Their production budget is determined by how much money a network will offer them for the show. And in order to make a show great they have to have buzz about it so that people want to watch, thus more eyes on the commercials. Or so the theory goes.

So, what is bad about DLing a show on the internet that is ad supported. Sure you are infringing, but you are also adding to the buzz that the show creates. You talk the show up and make others want to watch. "Did you see smallville last night?"

For my own part, I DL if I missed the show due to technical issues (Cable/Power outtage, Unexpected conflict, etc.) as I'd rather not wait for the rerun. DVD season's have just recently started to be offered and honestly this is just icing on the cake for them. They have already been paid for the work. The season DVD's in my opinion aren't marketed to people who missed the prior seasons, but to people who like the show and want to own a copy. People who are just trying to catch up should be left alone.


I guess the problem with DL'ing a TV show to catch up is, theoretically, that that stops you from catching up at rerun time. The networks are desparate (and not just for housewives) for eyeballs during the summer rerun season. The networks base their costs on being able to get more than one run from a show, and part of that is during the summer with perhaps different ad clients paying smaller rates for being a part of the rerun. Since this is a Tivo board, we'll assume that we all FF thru the spots anyway (legal, and the ad makers know this happens with a certain percentage of users), but they do use the rerun to hype their own new upcoming fall shows and want as many (perhaps non-Tivo) folks watching those reruns as they can get. DL'in cuts into this. Hell, the networks don't even like timeshifting, even though it's perfectly legal and has been going on since the days of the VCR. Remember NBC's "Supersized" episodes? Screw with the timeshifters -- teach 'em to watch the show live, when we schedule it!

Now I really don't care if you, or anyone else, DL's shows. Just know it's illegal and the reasons why some content providers would not be happy to know you do it
FlWingNut is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 12:56 PM   #58 (Print)
cynthetiq
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlWingNut
I guess the problem with DL'ing a TV show to catch up is, theoretically, that that stops you from catching up at rerun time. The networks are desparate (and not just for housewives) for eyeballs during the summer rerun season. The networks base their costs on being able to get more than one run from a show, and part of that is during the summer with perhaps different ad clients paying smaller rates for being a part of the rerun. Since this is a Tivo board, we'll assume that we all FF thru the spots anyway (legal, and the ad makers know this happens with a certain percentage of users), but they do use the rerun to hype their own new upcoming fall shows and want as many (perhaps non-Tivo) folks watching those reruns as they can get. DL'in cuts into this. Hell, the networks don't even like timeshifting, even though it's perfectly legal and has been going on since the days of the VCR. Remember NBC's "Supersized" episodes? Screw with the timeshifters -- teach 'em to watch the show live, when we schedule it!

Now I really don't care if you, or anyone else, DL's shows. Just know it's illegal and the reasons why some content providers would not be happy to know you do it


here's some other fodder to the syndication and DVD waiters....

the episodes do not appear intact 100% at all. there is no guarantee that the episode you watch on 24SE1Ep01 is the same as the broadcasted version.

Music may be removed because of licensing restrictions, cuts may be made to allow for increased ad space (happens mostly during syndication reformating) and also just for time alottment, which is what happens to the Supersized episodes when they get reformatted for syndication.

the only time you are guaranteed intact show is to watch the orginal broadcast.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an ******* or you're not.
cynthetiq is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 01:09 PM   #59 (Print)
ccwf
国際化 Member
 
ccwf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Malibu
Posts: 8,626
Send a message via AIM to ccwf
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynthetiq
the only time you are guaranteed intact show is to watch the orginal broadcast.
Although there are some counterexamples: Highlander and other international shows (edited when broadcast in the U.S.) or the Xena finale (showed an extended length version after original broadcast).
ccwf is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
Old 05-27-2005, 01:13 PM   #60 (Print)
cynthetiq
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccwf
Although there are some counterexamples: Highlander and other international shows (edited when broadcast in the U.S.) or the Xena finale (showed an extended length version after original broadcast).


yes, the interenational market adds many other layers of problems and issues.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, Indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Independent, either you're an ******* or you're not.
cynthetiq is offline Report Bad Post Report Post
 
Forum Jump
Thread Tools

Go Back  TiVo Community Archive2 > Main TiVo Forums > TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:22 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(C)opyright - All Rights Reserved. No information may be posted elsewhere without written permission.
TiVo® is a registered trademark of TiVo Inc. This site is not affiliated with TiVo Inc.


Spider History Index