Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Security

Harry Potter, Macrovision and Economics 453

Posted by chrisd from the macrovision-is-near-sighted dept.
markthebrewer writes "Apparantly Warner Home Video have released Harry Potter and the Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone without any of the usual Macrovision copy-protection systems. Looks like its just a trial, but someone's done the maths and decided it may be cheaper not to copy-protect videos after all. Find the full article in the New Scientist." There is certainly something desperate about macrovisions response to this development. Does anyone see macrovision as a real barrier to copying anymore? What a bunch of snake oil salesmen these people are. In related news, I'm marketing my own personal copy protection device.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Harry Potter, Macrovision and Economics More

Harry Potter, Macrovision and Economics

Comments Filter:
  • I thought Macrovision was mandatory? Does Time Warner get an out because it's a member of the consortium? That certainly doesn't sound fair.

    • Re:Violation of DVD Consortium Licensing ? (Score:5, Informative)

      by timster ( 32400 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @12:25AM (#3699105)
      Macrovision is mandatory in the DVD player. The player itself is responsible for creating the signal; you can't encode Macrovision into an MPEG stream. The creators of the disks have to decide whether to use Macrovision on their disk though, which is basically "set the Macrovision bit" or not. If they choose to set the macrovision bit then they're supposed to pay some money per copy to Macrovision.

    • Re:Violation of DVD Consortium Licensing ? (Score:4, Informative)

      by karmawarrior ( 311177 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @08:22AM (#3700183) Journal
      No, it isn't, and more to the point this isn't unusual. I had a DVD player for six months, hooked up to my TV through the VCR, before I had to get a modulator because I bought something with Macrovision on it. Before then, I'd thought that the consensus that DVDs were unusuable without a direct TV hookup or a modulator meant that my VCR was funky - it never occured to me that Macrovision might not actually cover 90% of discs. This includes blockbusters like The Fifth Element, Reservoir Dogs, Groundhog Day, etc.


      If something is protected with Macrovision, it'll generally have the Macrovision logo on the back together with the Dolby Digital and Region stuff. Those who think it's compulsory might want to flick through their DVD collection and look.


      Now this article is newsworthy if it's suggesting that Harry Potter is Region Free and CSS Free too. But there's nothing to hint at that in the write up. Harry Potter is macrovision free because it doesn't actually help, it's expensive (DVD content makers have to pay a per-disc * per-crippled-frame royalty for using the system), and it's a load of crap.

  • Macrovision is easy to defeat (Score:4, Informative)

    by DickBreath ( 207180 ) on Thursday June 13, 2002 @11:43PM (#3698913) Homepage
    I have defeated Macrovision on both VHS and DVD, only for legal purposes, by simply using what amounts to a video amplifier, which I picked up at Worst Buy some years back for about $50.

    • Re:Macrovision is easy to defeat (Score:4, Informative)

      by Goldberg's Pants ( 139800 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @04:30AM (#3699725) Journal
      If you get certain APEX model DVD players (be sure to check the serial number, some require hardware modding), the A1500, available at most Walmart's, you can download a rom from an A1000, burn it to CD, stick the CD in and voila, your player is now Macrovision free, region free, AND can defeat the RCE protection that is used on some disks.

      Add to this the fact that the APEX is one of the few that converts PAL to NTSC on the fly, thus allowing European disks to play, and you've got a great player.

      I've flashed mine and tested it with a region 2, PAL disk and it played fine. I wanted to play out of region disks mostly, but I also wanted to defeat Macrovision purely on principle. Fuckers.

    • Re:Macrovision is easy to defeat (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @08:06AM (#3700124) Homepage
      Macrovision is just a really lame hack... here's an excerpt on how it works...

      The way the copy protection signal works is interesting. It's not that the second VCR "knows" that the video signal is coming from a video tape. It's that the signal coming from the original video tape contains a special type of noise that the TV set does not notice, but that a VCR cannot handle. This noise signal confuses a component, known as an automatic gain control (AGC) circuit, in the VCR, and the confused AGC records the signal incorrectly.

      Macrovision copy protection was defeated minutes after it's release back in the 80's. it was very common to buy "video scrubbers" or "video stabalizers" to fix macrovision. today, anyone with a DVD player and a TBC (time Base Correcter) can make perfect VHS or SVHS copies without a hint of that macrovision was ever there. and the TBC gives the side effect of makking the video signal perfect. TBC's can be purchased surplus for as little as $50.00 and everyone that is very interested in video should own one.

      Everything I have ever seen come out of the Macrovision company has been a lame attempt, i expect the same level of incompetence from them in the future.

  • Reasons for not cp'ing (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NickRob ( 575331 ) on Thursday June 13, 2002 @11:43PM (#3698916)
    The reason is simple. The first wave of Harry Potter video buyers are going to be parents driven crazy by their children to get the thing. Middle America usually just goes to Wal-Mart or some store and picks it up. For $20 they get the best babysitter in the world. It's cheaper to make non-cp videos so that makes profit margins go even higher up for the video.

    No parents is going to let their kid keep screaming while they go call people they know and see if they can't make a copy for it. They'll go to the store and get it and quiet the kid.

    • Oops... (Score:2, Informative)

      by NickRob ( 575331 )
      Video == DVD I mean. I just get into that habit of calling any sort of movie at home a video.
    • An other reason for not cp'ing, it in the article :
      Analysts suspect that Warner left the release unprotected, to investigate whether this would have a significant impact on sales.

      Go ahead everybody, buy a copy of Harry Potter, and if they find that the "unprotected" video have more sales than expected, this will be the end of protected DVD :-)

  • Good. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheSHAD0W ( 258774 ) on Thursday June 13, 2002 @11:44PM (#3698919) Homepage
    Adding Macrovision to video doesn't prevent the pirates from duplicating videos, so the biggest effect of Macrovision is to reduce the quality of the video. I applaud Time Warner for having some sense. (Now if they'd only let people log onto AOL without using their stupid software...)

  • Blah, which some knowhow you can get rid of it (Score:5, Informative)

    by Verizon Guy ( 585358 ) on Thursday June 13, 2002 @11:45PM (#3698932) Homepage
    On some DVD players, [nerd-out.com] you can disable Macrovision by means of uploading a new ROM into the player by burning it onto an ISO 9660 CD-R, or by hitting a secret key combination on the remote. It's mostly APEXes and Daewoos [kimsvideo.com] that let you do this; ironic that they are the cheapest yet most hackable DVD players. I have a cute little APEX I scored for $70 at Circuit City... that sucker plays DVDs, VCDs, SVCDs, CD-Rs, MP3s (!), and they kitchen sink. Most DVD players have a "Factory setting" menu that you can get to, but you need to know the secret code.

    Of course you'd never get goodies like this from the big boys (aka Sony, Toshiba, Panasonic).

    • The big boys do support MP3s - my Pioneer 533K plays MP3s (same as the slim-line US Pioneer model - can't remember the model number at the moment). I believe there's a Denon that does MP3s as well. The Pioneer also reads recordable DVDs (multiple formats), SVCDs, CDRs, and VCDs. And, it's modded to be region free (but not macrovision free - couldn't be bothered, since what's the point of VHS if you've got DVD quality). The only thing it doesn't play is DivX. Not bad!

      • what's the point of VHS if you've got DVD quality

        For one thing, some TVs don't properly blank the VBlank portion of the signal. For another, mothers want to make durable copies of Dreamworks animated movies so that the originals don't get scratched up.

        • A second after I hit post, I knew someone was going to point this out. Point taken, and you're right. I really meant only specifically in my case, but stupidly didn't point that out.

          BTW, thanks for your suggestions about ECMAscript etc from ages ago. Didn't end up using it, but it was helpful in providing a different viewpoint.

    • Damn it, I wish my DVD player could play the kitchen sink. I hear those sinks are damn good musicians...
    • Most DVD players can be chipped.. Both of the players I've had have been chipped (live in the UK, expensive DVDs over here so that I can play any region disks.. Yes even RCE disks)..
      Very few DVD players now have menus to change region (at least in the uk) since the movie makers complained a little...

      Oddly enough the 'chipping' process generally removes macrovision, isn't that a bonus ;)

      But I know of Sony, Panasonic, Pioneer, etc DVD players being chipped, and having macrovision removed its not just the small / cheap players..

      Take a look at http://www.dvdlibrary.co.uk/bonus_kit.htm for mods for DVD players. Not sure it it does macrovision disabling, just searched on google.

      In the UK I am pretty sure that this is totally legal, after the first sale principle, and that region restrictions (or other unsanctioned trade barriers) are actually illegal under EU law. I've never had a problem buying, selling or speaking to shopkeepers about it.

      If you have a DVD player look at the mods, some don't even violate warranty!!!
      Of course IANAL

      Z.

    • Phillips (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Jeff DeMaagd ( 2015 )
      Missed some, just about all Phillips DVD players can be hacked by using a universal remote.

      Most DVD player brands have hacks available for their more common players, and even some of the less common, higher end players.

      You can get playback from the off-brand DVD players, but my experience is that it's better to get a bigger name-brand player than to cheap out. I'd rather go for quality, so I went for a Panasonic RP-56 and chipped it. Its hack consists of a simple chip and a firmware upgrade.

  • This just means... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Throatwarbler Mangro ( 584565 ) <delisle42 AT yahoo DOT com> on Thursday June 13, 2002 @11:47PM (#3698941) Homepage
    ...that they've obviously implemented a copy protection scheme so subtle and insipid that mere Muggles can't detect it.

  • Let me just take this space to ask: (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 13, 2002 @11:47PM (#3698945)
    Here's a little mini Ask Slashdot for you.

    What is the cheapest and easiest that a piece of Macrovision-defeating hardware can be obtained for?

    Does that figure change if you are willing to construct the pieces yourself from stuff at radio shack?

    Does that figure change if you demand it come assembled for you?

    Does that figure change if you're willing to do mail order?

    I have no interest or plans in illegally copying any videos or dvds in the future. I am merely asking as a point of academic interest, as someone who finds the study of technological methods of information transfer interesting.
    • Macrovision can be bypassed, many times, just by use of various off-the-shelf equipment that many of us already have on hand, so the first answer is '0'. Example is piping the video thru a digital video camera, etc.

      You don't have to 'construct' anything, necessarily, so much as know where to find the needed firmware update, and how to apply it. In this case, the cost would only include your time and maybe a blank CD-R.

      Demanding it come that way....well, you can buy a DVD/VCR in Seoul, and for another $50.00 or less, they will disable Macrovision while you wait. Brand doesn't seem to matter. You can also ask this of some of the less than prominent supply houses, and they will do it for you, again for a small fee (mail order).

      There are also devices that have what are called loop-hole or hidden menus (Tredex), that will allow you to bypass region codes and/or macrovision. It's just a matter of contacting their customer support people and asking how... Many times, these hidden menus are in the service mode side of the box, and all it takes is a quick tour of the internet to learn how to access them.

      In summary, cost to disable Macrovision is most often your time, and little else. $50 at the most.
      • Macrovision can be bypassed, ... Example is piping the video thru a digital video camera, etc.

        Doesn't always work. My Sony D8 camera will, if you try to feed a Macrovision-mangled signal into the composite inputs, pop up a warning that the signal is copy protected and refuses to record it. (Experiment performed purely in the interest of science, honest.)

        But yes, there are plenty of other ways around that.
    • It can easily be bypassed using standard Radio Shack hardware used to adapt the RF outputs of a DVD (or other) player to coaxial cable. I had to buy one of those because my TV didn't have the RF inputs, and when I tried running it through my VCR's inputs, Macrovision kicked in. Now I can just plug the coaxial output from the little converter box into the VCR and record away. Cost me about $US30, and of course you can get one for cheaper if you try.

      Of course, who would want to record a DVD with a VCR anyway? That's what DVD-ROM drives and DivX are for.

    • Re:Let me just take this space to ask: (Score:5, Informative)

      by shepd ( 155729 ) <slashdot@org.gmail@com> on Friday June 14, 2002 @01:29AM (#3699297) Homepage Journal
      >I am merely asking as a point of academic interest, as someone who finds the study of technological methods of information transfer interesting.

      In that case, I'm sure this [repairfaq.org] will peak your interest.

      My guess: $15 if you buy the parts from digikey, $50 for Radio Shack parts.

      Warning: The data in the above and below links is only to be used for stabilizing the video output from your DVD player for a projection TV.

      Oh, and here's the rest [repairfaq.org] of it. I'm sure it'll be quite educational.

  • Hmm, shoe is on the other foot ? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by EvilBastard ( 77954 ) on Thursday June 13, 2002 @11:49PM (#3698955) Homepage
    Says CEO Bill Krepick: "Effective immediately, Macrovision's licensing policy (requires that) 100% of the title must be copy protected in a geographic territory or, if less than 100% of the title is copy-protected, then a Macrovision copy protection logo must be included in the exterior packaging of those units that are copy protected."

    So, this would be a major company changing it's existing terms and conditions with another major company without modifying the original contract or renegotiating with the other party ?

    Companies have been doing this to the consumer for such a long time, I wonder what's going to happen when a real corporation with real undead lawyers tries to have this done to them.
    • What Krepick likely _wanted_ to put out was something such as "...or, if less than 100% of the title is copy-protected, then a Macrovision copy protection logo must be include in the exterior packaging of all units, whether copy-protected or not." But his lawyers wouldn't let him do it. Slimy creepingk bastardos....

  • Macrovision running scared already!? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FrozenFrog ( 539212 ) on Thursday June 13, 2002 @11:52PM (#3698971)

    Macrovision a little scared by this? From the article:

    Says CEO Bill Krepick: "Effective immediately, Macrovision's licensing policy (requires that) 100% of the title must be copy protected in a geographic territory or, if less than 100% of the title is copy-protected, then a Macrovision copy protection logo must be included in the exterior packaging of those units that are copy protected."

    I say this is excellent news. Now I can make sure I only buy DVDs *without* Macrovision protection. Not because I want to pirate them (I own almost 300 DVDs now), but because Macrovision deteriorates the video signal. Don't "protect" your product by lowering the quality.

    Frog

  • At a crossroads... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Hangtime ( 19526 ) on Thursday June 13, 2002 @11:55PM (#3698989) Homepage
    We are now getting down to the nuts and bolts i.e. cost-benefit analysis of copy protection. There will always be an element that will not pay for a product and the large studios know that. However, where 10 years ago people would hook up two VCRs and record the movie they rented, your now casual copier goes out to Kaaza before a movie is even released in theaters and downloads a copy. With the ease of use, proliferation of broadband, and movement of copying forces to another medium no wonder Warner decided to put up a test balloon and ship a product without Macrovision. Besides that five cents maybe spent better elsewhere especially if that five cents doesn't buy you anymore protection against copying then you already have. Be afraid Macrovision...its not the fact that you don't do your job because you do for the most part; its the fact that you have become obsolete in a day of P2P and broadband.

    HT
    • "Be afraid Macrovision...its not the fact that you don't do your job because you do for the most part; its the fact that you have become obsolete in a day of P2P and broadband."

      This is basically true. However, I can see why they do it. It'd be dirt-simple to buy a DVD and make endless copies to tape, then sell the tapes. This is a seperate problem that has nothing to do with the consumer, but those dudes in China that are making decent money off it. I don't think Macrovision is whole-heartedly intended to stop the casual 'rental copy', I think it's there to stop the guys re-selling the tapes.

      I didn't get the impression that the average customer was the one with anything at stake here. I think WB's attitude is 'the pirates got the tools, why should we buy an expensive lock that everybody has the key to?'.

      If Hollywood wants to stop stuff making it to Kazaa, then what they need to do is make online-video a reality. *Willing to PAY for streamed movies*

  • DVD value CD (Score:4, Insightful)

    by zzubzzub ( 584831 ) <buzzNO@SPAMpiersol.com> on Thursday June 13, 2002 @11:55PM (#3698991) Homepage
    I think the MPAA is (slightly) smarter than the RIAA as the retail/cost ratio of DVDs is not as insane as CDs. Many DVDs can be found for under $10. For most folks, it's just easier to buy a DVD than to deal with copying it.

    -- Buzz

  • After all that work..... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Nate Enderle ( 579319 ) <hotstuff3181NO@SPAMhotmail.com> on Thursday June 13, 2002 @11:57PM (#3698999)
    and money to get Macrovision not only supported, but legaly required (DMCA), they finaly figure out that it is simply less expensive to not use it after all.
  • You know I *hate* Harry Potter. Not sure why, but nevertheless I plan to purchase a copy of this just to support the idea.

    Having little kids around makes copies necessary. VHS tapes are cheap and durable as far as kids are concerned. Make a copy and let them use the old VCR as often as they want. (Not that I always do this, but sometimes I want to.)

    Making a personal copy is ok and should remain so. Maybe someone there gets it. Maybe not, it is likely about the money.

    Still, can't help but wonder where this is leading.

  • Brilliant move (Score:5, Insightful)

    by joel8x ( 324102 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @12:06AM (#3699033) Homepage
    I really don't believe that Macrovision is necessary, and this Harry Potter example is a perfect one. If your a fan of the movie, you want to own the original. That pretty much sums up the whole Video and Music pirating industry. I guarantee there are thousands of Slashdotters out there that own the bootlegged DVD screener rip of Lord of the Rings, and I bet that almost everyone of you will buy at least one if not both of the DVDs when they become available later this year - just to have it. You like to display it in its packaging on a nice shelf next to your home theatre system, you enjoy the special features that one time you look at them (except for the Kevin Smith movies - the extra stuff on those are golden). Its just a strange little need to have the original - you feel like your contributing to something you enjoy. I'll download any movie I'm a fan of, but rest assured that as soon as its available on DVD, I'll pick it up.
    • "If your a fan of the movie, you want to own the original. "

      Im not convinced that Macrovision's really to stop the casual copier, but those dudes using DVD's to make endless VHS copies to sell. The article points out that would-be copiers already have the tools.

      I've yet to hear of anybody copying rental movies to tape. Just isn't worth it.

  • What Macrovision? Just hit (Score:5, Interesting)

    by (H)elix1 ( 231155 ) <slashdot.helix@nOSPaM.gmail.com> on Friday June 14, 2002 @12:06AM (#3699034) Homepage Journal
    the secret menu [nerd-out.com] on your 600a Apex player and turn it off. I jumped to circut city when I saw the remote control trick posted on slashdot a while back...
    • Did anyone besides me get a kick out of the screen shots which accompany these instructions ? The "loophole" menu, which lets you change the region and disable Macrovision, displays a message on the bottom of the screen. It says "You should not be here".

  • Scary (Score:2, Funny)

    by slntnsnty ( 90352 )
    To think that anyone would even desire to copy this movie.

  • FUD! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Cinematique ( 167333 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @12:10AM (#3699057)
    Hey kids, look! FUD! [macrovision.com]
  • Now that Warner Home Video has woken up and smelt the coffee ... will it be able to convince others (hollywood) to do the same?

    If this "test" is successful, how long before the RIAA sues Warner for not following lock-step with the rest of the entertainment-industry against pirates?

    It's also kinda cool that the DVD was also not protected, not just the video.

  • Can't find the link right off, but someone had a page up about the RIAA discovering the Vinyl Record as the latest and greatest news in the providing copy protection.

    No direct digital copying there.

    Complete with puzzled script kiddes who couldn't figure out how to hack it. no bits and bytes.

    ;-)

    • And now I find the link:

      http://www.urbanreflex.com/may24_02/record.html [urbanreflex.com]

      Music Industry Unveils New Piracy-Proof Format: A Black, Plastic Disc With Grooves On It

      Music bosses have unveiled a revolutionary new recording format that they hope will help win the war on illegal file sharing which is thought to be costing the industry millions of dollars in lost revenue.

      Nicknamed the 'Record', the new format takes the form of a black, vinyl disc measuring 12 inches in diameter, which must be played on a specially designed 'turntable'.

      "We can state with absolute certainty that no computer in the world can access the data on this disc," said spokesman Brett Campbell. "We are also confident that no-one is going to be able to produce pirate copies in this format without going to a heck of a lot of trouble. This is without doubt the best anti-piracy invention the music industry has ever seen."

      As part of the invention's rigorous testing process, the designers gave some discs to a group of teenage computer experts who regularly use file swapping software such as Limewire and gnutella and who admit to pirating music CDs. Despite several days of trying, none of them were able to hack into the disc's code or access any of the music files contained within it.

      "It's like, really big and stuff," said Doug Flamboise, one of the testers. "I couldn't get it into any of my drives. I mean, what format is it? Is it, like, from France or something?"

      In the new format, raw audio data in the form of music is encoded by physically etching grooves onto the vinyl disc. The sound is thus translated into variations on the disc's surface in a process that industry insiders are describing as 'completely revolutionary' and 'stunningly clever.'

      To decode the data stored on the disc, the listener must use a special player which contains a 'needle' that runs along the grooves on the record surface, reading the indentations and transforming the movements back into audio that can be fed through loudspeakers.

      Even Shawn Fanning, the man who invented Napster, admits the new format will make file swapping much more difficult. "I've never seen anything like this," he told reporters. "How does it work?"

      As rumours that a Taiwanese company has been secretly developing a 12 inch wide, turntable -driven, needle-based, firewire drive remain unconfirmed, it would appear that the music industry may, at last, have found the pirate-proof format it has long been searching for.

  • My PCs are all SCSI-based, because I have DAT backup drives on them. Macrovision's "SafeDisk" system for copy-protecting software CDs appears to be incompatible with SCSI CD-ROM drives. So most games won't load at all. Worse, some important software (such as MathCAD and Visual Source Safe Y2K Update) wouldn't read.

    I've sent back about a thousand dollars worth of software because of this.

    • My boyfriend was using a SCSI CD-ROM drive (he's since moved to IDE DVD-ROM drives because SCSI DVD-ROM drives are far and few in between) and he was able to run Safedisc protected games. He did get a performance hit on Black and White, but I'm not sure that he's had problems with any other games.


  • Here's another popular personal copy protection device [google.com].

    • Beautiful. Although you do realize by posting that on Slashdot, the last bastion of all that is *Right And Good And Not Copy Protected*, the chances of any progeny of rights-loving-American-geeks will be completely nullified, and so there will be no one to carry out the war once they've gone the way of the 8-track. Oh wait. Never mind.

  • Theares, Home and Otherwise (Score:5, Insightful)

    by xSterbenx ( 549640 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @12:51AM (#3699198)
    (I say this in terms of DVD not VHS)

    When I want to see a movie, I want to see the whole effect: the sound, the quality, everything. I have never watched a pirated DVD movie before, so I will be the first to admit that I don't know how good of a quality the rip may be. Perhaps very good, I just don't know.

    In terms of actually _watching_ the movie it doesn't matter. Anyone can hook up on the web and grab pretty much whatever movie they want to watch. From what I've seen, movies found online are substandard quality. Yes, some are top-notch; however, then you must watch them on you computer system (which for some people a 21 inch monitor suffices).

    Personally, I would prefer to watch movies with my wife in my living room on my TV with surround sound and DVD component quality. Perhaps this is old fashioned; yet I believe the atmosphere of a movie is just as important as the movie itself. I know quite a few people who had rips of AToC who refused to watch them until they had seen it in the theatres for the _full_ effect. Those same people will buy the DVD when it comes out regardless of their opinions of the movies itself (after all its Star Wars, though this has been debated already a million times already). This isn't always the case, obviously. However, I think the majority of people (ie computer-illterate) would much rather prefer to shell out a few bucks for the actual DVD than watch some ripped version on a computer screen (or burned to a DVD, which again I have not yet seen and maybe it IS as good as the original). I myself have taken to buying pre-viewed DVDs from blockbuster, they usually cost around $15.00 and in most cases are in perfect condition.

    In terms of Harry Potter, Blockbuster actually has a deal where if you rent the movie, you can can come in later and buy a previewed DVD for only $10.00. Not to sound like an ad for BB, but 10.00 for a DVD is not a bad deal (although you have to add in the 4.00 you spent to rent it in the first place).
    • Not only that, but Blockbuster chose Harry Potter as the one title, in all of their inventory, that they would price match any local competitor on. CompUSA has been selling limited quantities (really limited, as in sold out in the first hour limited) of Harry Potter for $9.95 brand new. So, all you gotta do is take the print ad for CompUSA showing the $9.95 price over to Blockbuster and then you can buy a new copy for $10 and not have to worry about ever renting it.

  • The Macrovision corporation. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 14, 2002 @01:38AM (#3699316)
    I work in the set-top-box industry, and on several occasions I've worked with folks from Macrovision, Inc. I always found them to be quite intelligent and aware of the limitations and problems concerning their technology. Granted, these were engineers and not marketoids, but they seemed to be a genuinely cool group of people. I certainly didn't get any of the Copying=Communism bullshit we hear from so many in the Hollywood sphere of influence.
    I guess what I'm trying to say is that you shouldn't judge a company on their press releases alone. Obviously Macrovision has an interest in seeing their copy protection scheme applied to DVDs, but that's what their company does.
    And as far as the question of whether anyone sees Macrovision as an obstacle to copying, the answer is definitely YES. I would liken it to the security on your house - you lock the door, right? Well, will that keep out a determined burglar? No, but it will keep the honest people honest.

    Please, feel free to flame away. This is just my opinion, based on the people I've dealt with at Macrovision.
  • Macrovision "copy-protection" is just as effective as the subject above: words, which can be used to sue you. It would actually be less profitful for them to actually make copying impossible, just get the de-facto standard on compensation for violation, and you get much more bang per pirate.

  • Glitch? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by NFNNMIDATA ( 449069 )
    People are putting way too much faith in Warners here. I would not be surprised to find out that this was just a manufacturing glitch, not intentional, and that Macrovision was indeed paid their per-copy fee as usual.

  • "Mracovision" (Score:4, Funny)

    by Alex Belits ( 437 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @01:47AM (#3699341) Homepage
    In Russian some people call Macrovision "Mracovision", what can be approximately translated as "see the darkness". I find it a very funny and appropriate name for that bullshit.

  • Logos on the videos (Score:4, Interesting)

    by TheMCP ( 121589 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @01:54AM (#3699362) Homepage
    I noticed that Macrovision will require that for videos in which less than 100% of the production run uses Macrovision technology, those that do will have to be labeled with the Macrovision logo.

    I wonder if this is something Macrovision has been waiting for an excuse to do. I notice they have actually been advertising themselves on videos, and they phrase their description so that it sounds like some sort of "protection" technology, so an uninformed consumer might think that it's a good thing that somehow prevents their video from wearing out rather than a nasty thing that restricts their fair use ability.

    I'm basically wondering if Macrovision is trying to confuse, obscure, and obfuscate what they really are in a weird attempt to try to get consumers to actually look for or ask for their logo on stuff. If that's the case, I wonder why they're so desperate since they seem to have basically 100% market share already.

  • VCD Helper... (Score:5, Informative)

    by chronos2266 ( 514349 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @02:04AM (#3699387)
    VCD Helper [vcdhelp.com] has had a list of DVD Player hacks [vcdhelp.com] available for quite a while. From everything to modifying your brightness to reconfiguring country codes through methods put in by the manufacturer for testing. It's really interesting to see the hidden features of your otherwise normal DVD player :)

  • Best cure for casual piracy.. BE NICE! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NanoGator ( 522640 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @02:12AM (#3699395) Homepage Journal
    If the MPAA is worried about me downloading a movie w/o paying for it, the best defense they have is to have a good rapport with me. If I respect you, I'm not going to let harm come to you. Unfortunately, they have treated us all like they need to throw us all in jail. At least that is what I envisioned when I heard about the SSSCA.

    Let's face it, the tools are out there. They'll always be out there. Whether we use them in a damaging way or not is dependent on two things: 1.) Incentive not to, i.e. extras on the DVD and so on... 2.) Whether or not we care.

    Frankly, when I first heard about the SSSCA and it's over-reaching implications, I was out for blood! I still am, really. If I do something the MPAA wouldn't like, I feel good about it. Film88.com? I probably would have been all over that had it not gone down, half because I knew the MPAA would have a shitfit. This sentiment is far more damaging than DeCSS or any other circumvention tool around.

    What the MPAA needs to do, instead of trying to invent new technology to thwart copying they don't want, is to make us friendly towards them. Show that they're out to have fun instead of out to squeeze money out of our wallets. When that happens, I'm happy to give them my money for stuff like DVD's.

    Make it socially unacceptable to download copies of movies w/o paying for them and you'll get far more done than using encryption that somebody's going to break.

  • HP DVD has Macrovision on (Score:4, Insightful)

    by comic-not ( 316313 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @02:12AM (#3699396) Homepage
    At least the one I bought for the kids had Macrovision enabled. Well, I pressed the magic buttons to conjure Macrovision away and copied the movie on VHS. Mind you, that was completely legal, since the video was for personal use (kids went to see their DVD-less grandparents for a couple of weeks and the only way to prevent the kids from driving poor gramps and granny nuts was to supplement them with the movie). Anyway, I find the whole Macrovision scheme laughable and completely disingenious, other than from the point of Macrovision the Co. who has successfully sold hi-tech snake oil for some time now.

  • Rough figures on how much that saved - in a week (Score:3, Informative)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @02:34AM (#3699449)
    These are terribly rough numbers as I'm not sure how many copies were really sold, only gross dollars sales figures from here [ninemsn.com.au].

    The linked article noted that HP sales totaled about $200 million (US) the first week of video release. I took a wild guess at each copy selling for $16 (about what I bought mine for), arriving then at a figure of $625k that they would have had to pay Macrovision at .05c a copy.

    And that's just the first week! I had never thought before about how much companies had to pay to have Macrovision - given how much it costs (or that it costs ANYTHING) I can't believe video companies use this technology at all! And I thought the lottery was the biggest stupidity tax going.

  • What's the big deal? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by haggar ( 72771 ) on Friday June 14, 2002 @02:37AM (#3699453) Homepage Journal
    The great majority of Miramax titles are published without Macrovision protection. I don't see Slashdot clamoring about that fact.

  • From the article:
    Analysts suspect that Warner left the release unprotected, to investigate whether this would have a significant impact on sales.

    Let's increase the sales figures for the non-protected DVD by buying it. Then we can convince the company that Macrovision actually hurts sales ...
  • I put the Harry Potter Widescreen version in my DVD ROM drive, and it asked me what region I wanted to set my DVD ROM to, and that I had only 5 more times I could change it. Maybe I've just been playing all-region discs since my reformat a few weeks back, but I remember the 5 number from when I set it up over a year ago, as well.

    off topic: Also, it has this buggy "InterActual" software fluff it tries to install on my system... I let it install, but it never sees a DVD in my DVD drive if there's a CD in my CD drive, and there's no easy way for me to hardcode what drive it should be looking at.

    back on topic: My guess is they know that people have figured out how to suck the VOBs and convert them if they really want to be mean evil people, and have decided not to waste the money right now. I'm sure this doesn't mean they have given up on protection altogether; they'll just make the next DVD-replacement format a bit wackier, I'm sure. Frankly, I'm all for them releasing their best formatted stuff with protection, as long as it doesn't interfere with the playback quality. While there may be some grey area in the concept of viewing a screener version of a movie to decide if you want to pay to see it, there is NO grey area when it comes to directly trading ripped DVDs (or CDs, for that matter).
  • I always thought it was designed to simulate tape stretch or a dirty playback head.
  • I use an old Ferguson 3V24 portable video recorder. It was intended for use with a large video camera, from the days before cute wee Sony Handycams. The whole thing comes as two boxes, each about the size of a small PC case - one is the tuner, one is the VCR itself. The goodie is that in order to deal with a potentially marginal signal from the camera (think long video leads here) it has signal correction stuff on the video inputs. Which splats Macrovision. W00t.
  • Well if the do this AND drop the price of the things they'll cut back priracy. Why would I pay a few pounds down the market for a dodgy pirate copy when I can have the same thing from the original source with guaranteed quality for the same price??

    Same applies to CD's. I'd buy more IF they were alot cheaper. The cost to maufacture is the same, but they'd make more profit by selling more....

    Just a thought..
  • I would not be surprised if the studio did the math and discovered that they make more money off the licensing for Harry Potter Action Figures sold to the families who've only seen it on pirated video than they would from selling a legit video to those same families.
  • Assume $25 is the average price of a DVD. If WB are saving 5 cents by not incorporating macrovision, that means they hope not to lose more than 1 in 500 sales to copying. That sounds reasonable.


    That's sales lost - the number of copies to originals might actually be higher, but I bet most of the people watching a pirate VHS copy of a DVD would never have bought the original anyway.


    Personally though I wonder how many extra DVDs they'd sell if they sold them for a fair price. A DVD costs cents to manufacture, costs less to transport than a VHS, takes up less shelf space, but sells for 150-200% of a VHS! I bet the profit margins for DVDs are double even if you add the cost of mastering and filling the disk with extras such as those crappy featurettes that they make anyway to send out in press kits and so on.

  • You spend millions to come up with a new technology to thwart people who can bust it in about two days for free. Meanwhile, you find your largely untested scheme causes Macs to freak and die. Then you end up in court in a class action suit.

  • regarding the copy-protected cds...

    As an Electronics technician, I can assure you that the felt-tip marker approach will NOT damage your hardware.
    the statement they make is grossly inaccurate.
    here is what they say:
    "It should be noted that using ink of any sort on the playing surface of the CD can cause loss of the entire contents of the CD. Introducing ink or foreign materials on the playing surface of a CD can also damage the CD player reading device. Consumers should be aware that any damaged media or corrupted media files caused by this hack may void any warranties for such media, the content contained thereon, or the playback or recording device. "

    this is wrong, since the CD surface never comes in contact with the optical pick-up assembly.
    What bold-faced liars!
    I felt this needed to be addressed.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Look! There! Evil!.. pure and simple, total evil from the Eighth Dimension!" -- Buckaroo Banzai

Close