Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Movie Burning Kiosks Coming To Retailers

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the halfway-and-no-good dept.

173

Vitaly Friedman writes "The motion picture industry is in talks with some major retailers about installing DVD burning kiosks in stores. It's an interesting idea, but one that almost entirely misses the point. Hollywood's movie distribution system is in dire need of a fix - very few will dispute that. Movie attendance has been suffering, DVD sales are slumping, and all the industry has managed to do is come up with a half-baked, unpopular download service and a scant handful of simultaneous releases. In another attempt to sort of give consumers what they want, the motion picture industry is thinking about allowing retailers to set up in-store kiosks for distribution."

cancel ×

173 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Uhh. (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15465791)

right...because the burning of the DVD in itself is what makes consumers download movies from the internet!?!

Seeing that that's what it's about we can now go to a store and have them burn a DVD for us? WTF?

Speaking from my own experience, this is what happens when you let McKinsey-esque people tell you what to do.

Why would I buy... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15465793)

...something that:

* Will last much less time than a standard DVD before failing
* Not play in all of my DVD players
* Mean I have to wait around for it to finish burning
* Probably cost as much, or more than, a regular DVD

I won't, that's the answer to that. Get with it Hollywood, you need to offer movies to download at a significantly discounted price, or with no DRM. Offering me less for more, which is what you try to do at every step, doesn't make me want to give you my hard-earned cash.

Re:Why would I buy... (2, Insightful)

zidohl (976382) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465885)

Well, the retail stores want to stay in the DVD buisness, and obviously, if they present a much worse product than the alternative of downloading it legally from the internet, they wont for long. So basicly it will be up to them to make a deal with Hollywood and present you with a better option if they really want to sell these DVDs.

The cost could essentially become lower, if they actually want to lower the price, because you eliminate the need of transporting the fully packed DVDs, you remove them from the shelves which gives them extra space for other products and they wont make more DVDs than they actually sell. However, standing around for the kiosk to download and burn the DVD would probably strain most peoples patience..

Re:Why would I buy... (3, Interesting)

Kasis (918962) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465940)

I agree, I dislike having to wait five minutes for my passport photos to be developed, I wonder how long this would take exactly?? In my personal home kiosk, it takes anywhere from half an hour to several hours to download a movie, then another quarter of an hour to decompress and burn it. And it's free...


If I'm standing in a retailers and I feel that a movie is worth paying for, I'll pick up a ready-pressed DVD from the shelf in a glossy box, pay for it and leave.


What exactly is the benefit of this service? Yes I did rtfa but I still can't see any advantage.

Re:Why would I buy... (1)

i.r.id10t (595143) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466239)

I haven't RTFA, but to keep people like you (and me) happy with minimal/no wait time, think of it as JIT manufacturing. Have all the movies already downloaded and sitting as disk images (or whatever) - do the updates at night, etc - and have 2 or 3 (or 20/30 for opening day big releases) copies of each already burned, ready to dispense. Replace them as they are bought. Minimal physical product that has to be kept around waiting for a buyer, no publisher warehousing, shipping, etc.

Of course, theres still that "won't play in all players, discs die quicker, etc" problem....

Re:Why would I buy... (1)

xjimhb (234034) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466503)

The benefit to this is having movies that are not currently available on DVD! All those great old "B" movies that are not economic to release, because the costs of production, warehouseing, sending to hundreds of stores each of which may sell one copy, all eat up far more than the potential profit. On the other hand, the cost of making and storing a DVD image file is negligible, sell a hundred copies and you make a profit, sell a thousand and it's pure gravy.

I for one would jump at the chance to replace my 20 year old VHS taped-off-Cinemax copies of "Hamburger: the Motion Picture" and "Stewardess School" with nice clean DVD copies, even if it cost the same as a commercial copy of a more popular movie (well, Wal-Mart prices, not some inflated "list" price.)

Of course if they display their usual business acumen and stock these kiosks with exactly the same titles that are on the shelf the idea is going to go NOWHERE!

Re:Why would I buy... (1)

joeykiller (119489) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466839)

I agree. That's what would make me a happy customer too. But I think you'll see that if you're thinking of movies produced within the Hollywood studio system, the same movies -- or fewer -- that what's available today on DVD will be available here. You have the same issues with digitizing movies from original prints/negatives here as you have with DVD releases, so the basic costs will be the same whether you think of using the digital version for DVDs or digital download.

Re:Why would I buy... (1)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466940)

That's an excellent point, and reminds me of Janice Ian's points about out-of-print music. But I don't find that the MPAA thinks this way. Making it easier/cheaper for niche markets to get permanent, durable copies of weird movies isn't a big priority. They seem to think DVD release happens in exactly one way: establish the market potential for a film, pad "extras" of immense-to-zero value, and put a $22.99 sticker on it.

I wonder whether it's partly because they can't/shouldn't admit that there are second-rate movies. Business realities compel them to pretend that Two-Cops-of-Different-Races-Fight-Some-Crime #1,224 belongs on the shelf right next to "Capote"

Re:Why would I buy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15466114)

Nowadays DVDs are burnt at ludicrous speeds. People who can plan a dinner reservation can surely manage to wait for a disc to be burnt. It's nothing compared to the amount of time it takes for netflix or amazon shipments to arrive.

Re:Why would I buy... (1)

ponden (977893) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466181)

For most of the movies, rental DVD is enough to be satisfied.
I only buy DVDs of impressed movies because of the cost problem.

If the price of the burnd-DVDs are near the rental one, It may consider to buy them.
But it seems unrealisitc.

Re:Why would I buy... (1)

zakezuke (229119) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466362)

...something that:

* Will last much less time than a standard DVD before failing


It would depend on the cost.

* Not play in all of my DVD players

New players cost as low as $50. There is Divx certified player at costco I saw recently for $50.00.

* Mean I have to wait around for it to finish burning

If it was connected to an online warehouse it could be worth the wait. If it just dispences the usual hollywood crap then it probally wouldn't be. I can imagine it would be handy to those who wanted for example to buy a copy of the DVD in the theater directly after the film. This at least would help combat camcorder piracy.

* Probably cost as much, or more than, a regular DVD

Could cost more, could cost less, it's hard to say. At least with the physical product you might find what you are looking for in the bargin/closeout bin. Without the issue of too much stock I imagine we'd be stuck with the $20/pop fee.

What "would" be nice is a kiosk that offered DVD-RW, where you could for example return with your handy dandy little disc and get the next episode of 24.

How this could work (2, Informative)

Simonetta (207550) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466476)

All the points above are valid and each will nulify any business plan that Hollywood had planned for this service.

This plan can only work if the films being distributed are:
    - Not available from Hollywood. This is great for the thousands of films made in Europe and India that don't get any distribution or review in the USA. The disadvantage of distributing films (or anything in the 'long tail') in this manner is that noone knows which few titles are good, and which of the remaining ones are mediocre.

    - Significantly cheaper than the current pre-pressed DVD distribution of blockbusters mode of business. Perhaps an 'eBay'-type of auction for little known titles whereby the highest bid after a day would get the opportunity to pickup the DVD-ROM with the downloaded and formatted film from the video store distribution point. The local video store would get half the auction price for the burning service against a minimum guaranteed price that would be made by the film distributor. Many details need to be worked out, but this major change in business model could work.

    Ah, but there's the rub.... It requires a major change in the mentality of the entertainment industry for a major change in the business model to occur. However, we all know that can never happen until they are either all bankrupt (unlikely with receipts at record levels) or some big company like Apple tricks or talks them into it.

Re:Why would I buy... (2, Insightful)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466904)

Get with it Hollywood, you need to offer movies to download at a significantly discounted price, and with no DRM.

Fixed it for you.

DVD+-R archival lifetime isn't so great (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15465797)

Hollywood found out they can sell you a product that self destructs.

Adaptation (3, Insightful)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465800)

FTFA: Retailers are concerned that digital downloads might spell an end to the sale of DVDs, and see the download-to-burn kiosks as a way to keep them in the DVD business.

If only could they realize they gotta adapt instead of run hacks to keep the good ol' days.
There weren't plenty of typing machine manifacturers that started making keybaords and mice as well I think. They just tried to keep the old ways and ceased to exist.

Re:Adaptation (2, Insightful)

patio11 (857072) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465846)

There weren't plenty of typing machine manifacturers that started making keybaords and mice as well I think.

Yeah, who ever heard of a rusty old anachronism like that typewriter manufacturer International Business Machines competing in the new economy. [etypewriters.com]

Re:Adaptation (1)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465895)

Insightful, my ass. Look, the GP had said "there weren't plenty of typing machine manifacturers". Is IBM plenty? Olivetti, Smith-Corona et al. don't seem to be the hottest stocks.

Re:Adaptation (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15465965)

Actually, at least in europe Olivetti was manufacturing computers and accessories at least until 1999, when they were bought out.

Re:Adaptation (1)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466121)

I know, but they were pretty crappy, not very successful, and in any case they were just one of a million sellers of branded generic i386 PCs. Pretty insignificant as a whole.

Adaptation-Intelligent Complaint. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15465942)

"If only could they realize they gotta adapt instead of run hacks to keep the good ol' days.
There weren't plenty of typing machine manifacturers that started making keybaords and mice as well I think. They just tried to keep the old ways and ceased to exist."

OH, J. S. Christ! Bugger all the geek perspective. I have news for you sparky, not everyone has or wants broadband. Not everyone wants their music on a burned disk, or stored on their hard drive. The "old ways" are the old ways because they work for the majority. Not some whiney minority who will never be satisfied until everything comes through a wire.

Re:Adaptation-Intelligent Complaint. (1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465959)

OH, J. S. Christ! Bugger all the geek perspective. I have news for you sparky, not everyone has or wants broadband.

My my, it seemed you just wanted to vent, never mind what I said has nothing to do with your reaction here.
Where did I even mention that everyone should have one?

Not everyone wants their music on a burned disk, or stored on their hard drive. The "old ways" are the old ways because they work for the majority.

Is the pianist at your local mute cinema still working there?

Not some whiney minority who will never be satisfied until everything comes through a wire.

The "minority" of 700 mln people worldwide with Internet connection just want an alternative, not an obliteration of the DVD's as a media.

Movie burning? (5, Funny)

MadFarmAnimalz (460972) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465801)

For a second, I thought this had something to do with the proper disposal of movies like Battlefield Earth...

Re:Movie burning? (1)

mysticwhiskey (569750) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465815)

Same here - I had visions of turning up to such a kiosk with a bootleg copy of "The Davinci Code" and waiting in line to dispose of it. After all, I'd hate to see it fall into anyone else's hands...

Re:Movie burning? (1)

Tx (96709) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465821)

Battlefield Earth is quality...compared to Gigli. Unfortunately what we need for these movies is selective memory erasure, incinerating the discs can't make you unwatch the abominations.

Re:Movie burning? (1)

Jesus_666 (702802) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466684)

No, what we need is an MST addon for TVs. You just plug it in and it automatically starts riffing bad movies.

The more expensive versions could come with a DVD furnace, though.

benefit? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15465803)

How is this better than buying the DVDs as one does now? You get to wait in the store for the DVD to be created, and pretend that it's more convenient than picking it off the shelf?

Let them know what you think! (4, Informative)

babbling (952366) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465804)

Now that Skype [skype.com] offers free calls to US numbers until the end of the year, why not drop the MPAA a line and let them know what's on your mind? Maybe we can all check in on them daily and thank them for their efforts!

Oh, and if you'd be so kind, could you also let them know that The Pirate Bay is back up? They seem to still be under the impression that it's down... (PDF link) [mpaa.org]

Oh. You might need their numbers [mpaa.org] :
Washington: (202) 293-1966
LA: (818) 995-6600
New York (listed as their "anti-piracy office"): (914) 378-0800

Re:Let them know what you think! (1)

Mork29 (682855) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465814)

Oh, and if you'd be so kind, could you also let them know that The Pirate Bay is back up? That's the impression I'm under... No hits due to politics The search function will be back later today. That's all I see when I do any sort of search.... sure, they're offering some ads, but later today has lasted more than a day or 2 now... I'm not doubting that it will come back, but why is everybody already claiming that the bay is up and running?

Re:Let them know what you think! (1)

Bad Ad (729117) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465856)

yet if you hit the browse button, you can download any torrent etc... id say that qualifies as "back up"

Re:Let them know what you think! (1)

cheaphomemadeacid (881971) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465962)

alice+voice synthesizer+skype need i say more? :) Go edit those alice-content files :D

Give value for money! (2, Interesting)

fluch (126140) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465806)

Hey! When will they learn, that one makes bussines by giving value for money and people will buy it? Why should I download a movie from the movie industries distribution channels if it costs nearly as much as a DVD, I can only watch it on my (non-existing) Windows PC and don't get any bonus material and won't get any nicely done packaging and that nearly for the price of a DVD?

If DVDs are sold for a reasonable price (here in Finland that is definitely not the case), then people buy it. And if the DVD burning kiosk should work, then they need to go down with the prices NOTICEABLE below the price of a DVD.

my 2 eurocent.
- Martin

attribute your sources! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15465807)

the summary paragraph is lifted pretty much directly from an arstechnica article

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060602-6975 .html [arstechnica.com]

Re:attribute your sources! (1)

GeffDE (712146) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465849)

I'm sure that the **AA would help Ars Technica with legal proceedings to sue those involved in this "paragraph stealing"

I have one already... (4, Funny)

AudioEfex (637163) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465820)

I already have a movie-burning kiosk in my home.

It's called BitTorrent. :)

AE

Re:I have one already... (4, Insightful)

Xugumad (39311) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465876)

*sigh* /.'s attitude of "It's okay to copy anything I want" is really, really getting tiring.

Look, yes, the movie companies are almostly solely producing overpriced undifferentiated mush. However, it's clearly mush a lot of you want. As such, is it so crazy to suggest you either pay for it, or if you genuinely feel it's over priced, make a stand by neither buying nor copying? All you're doing by copying movies/music/games/etc. is saying to the producers "I want your product, but don't want to pay for it".

The MPAA/RIAA are both fairly clearly evil incarnate, I agree. However, copying everything you want is not actually going to help, it's just going to give them more legal leverage. If you actually feel things need to change, stop buying, and stop copying. Go read a book or something :)

Re:I have one already... (1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465896)

All you're doing by copying movies/music/games/etc. is saying to the producers "I want your product, but don't want to pay for it".

Halleluia. Then we better keep copying, in case they figure out the way is by releasing free copies over the internet with ads in them. Movie shows are doing pretty well running just with ads for their income.

Price is part of the problem, availability is much larger. If I can neither buy it since it's not available nor watch it in the cinema, what options do I have? Yea go figure it out, there's availability issues, lots of the movies people worldwide want to see (learning from trailers and Internet, TV etc.) are simply not available for sale.

Re:I have one already... (5, Insightful)

pla (258480) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465989)

/.'s attitude of "It's okay to copy anything I want" is really, really getting tiring.

While I somewhat agree, you need to realize that (unlike most geek-oriented issues), that attitude reflects what the majority of humans feel.

People do not, and did not ever, respect the concept of copyright as more than a good idea in theory if not in implementation. But until very recently (historically speaking), individuals didn't have the option of violating copyrights on any significant scale, so the system remained basically intact.

Even prior to last 50 years, "piracy" still occurred (how many hand-painted copies of the Mona Lisa exist? I recall reading a number in the thousands recently). It just took much longer, and the resources necessary to pull it off on a large scale almost guaranteed detection.

But from moment photocopiers gained widepread availability, college students have photocopied textbooks. The introduction of the cassette tape also saw the introduction of massive music sharing - likewise for the VCR. As soon as software-compatible PCs appeared, everyone swapped software among friends. When CD burners appeared on the scene, they just replaced the cassette tape, and likewise for DVD burners.

And when the internet made piracy ever so much easier, people flocked to using it for exactly that purpose. When P2P made finding and downloading copyrighted content as close to trivial as any user-initiated action can get, the P2P networks turned into nothing short of massively distributed digital radio stations with the users as the program directors.


So why do I write the above? For perspective. You say that in-your-face piracy as a form of civil disobedience won't work for swaying minds - But no one's mind needs swaying. Society has seen the idea of copyright, and rejected it outright whenever physically possible.

We don't need to win mindshare buy-in - The media producers need to come up with a model that allows them to make money while accepting that people will copy their work regardless of the law.



And if P2P scares the RIAA, wait until the next step. Some wireless-enabled portable music players already allow sharing songs actively, but it still takes too much effort to consider more than a quirk. When (not if) that turns into a passive action, compatible with devices just about everyone has (whether iPod-like players, or cell phones, or PDAs, or wrist watches, or some new killer toy we haven't even imagined yet) - When everyone you pass in rush-hour traffic, or on a busy sidewalk, or in a crowded mall, automatically sends you their entire music library almost instantly and without the need for you to even click "okay" - I think that really will mean the absolute death of anything similar to our modern content-selling industries. And what I just described will happen - Some portable music players already can do exactly that, they just need faster transfer rates, more storage space, and most importantly, either ubiquity or compatibility with other devices.

The RIAA and MPAA has until then to come up with a new trick. If they want to focus their energy on litigation, or even on a laughable anti-piracy PR campaign - They may as well close up shop today.

So when you see geeks saying "I will pirate it if I can, stick it to The Man!", don't bother getting annoyed - Whether or not such people know their "real" motives, they don't say anything new, or surprising, or even express an unpopular sentiment. Instead, look at them as a symptom of a badly broken system, broken from the start and finally approaching complete disintigration.

Re:I have one already... (2)

swillden (191260) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466417)

People do not, and did not ever, respect the concept of copyright as more than a good idea in theory if not in implementation.

True. Further, I think the legislation purchased by the media industry over the last couple decades has actually made it worse. The man on the street in 2006 doesn't even know that copyright does expire, or understand that it's supposed to be a short-term sacrifice for a long-term good. Seriously, go ask a few non-geek, non-lawyer, average people who owns the works of William Shakespeare. It's amazing how many of them think that's a reasonable, if trivial, question.

Since copyright is (rightly) percieved as perpetual, the trade of short term restriction for long-term increase in the public domain is not understood at all (rightly, since it no longer exists), and copying is (rightly) seen as doing little harm, the average person feels just fine about it, in spite of the media industry's continuing attempts to demonize personal infringement.

And that's largely the media industry's *fault*. They made their bed, let them lie in it.

Re:I have one already... (1)

Yizzerin (979112) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466886)

I agree...but a further problem with the current copyright and music/video/whatever industry situation is that you never feel like you are actually buying the media from the person who created it. Instead, you buy it from a (usually big chain) store, who bought it from a big conglomerate, who paid some portion to the actual artists to produce it. Set up this way, the negative feelings of the "man on the street" are exacerbated by the disconnection from the artist. I think many people would be more willing to pay for media if they felt like they were supporting the artists, instead of a slickly packaged machine/company bent on earning money.

Re:I have one already... (1)

bit01 (644603) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466230)

*sigh* /.'s attitude of "It's okay to copy anything I want" is really, really getting tiring.

The MPAA's commercial propaganda claiming "It's not okay to copy anything at any time" is also really tiresome.

... is saying to the producers "I want your product, but don't want to pay for it".

Your assumption is playing right into the MPAA's biased view of the world. Try to think outside their box. Don't think of the elephant [smh.com.au] .

People have been sharing since the dawn of time and it's the MPAA's self serving view of the world that needs some revision.

Your suggestion won't make much difference in fixing the problem. The MPAA will continue do anything that maximises there profit, particularly on the sunk cost of the movies they already continue to repeatedly sell. Whether piracy is occurring will hardly affect that at all. And that has been true for every generation of copying technology.

---

It's wrong that an intellectual property creator should not be rewarded for their work.
It's equally wrong that an IP creator should be rewarded too many times for the one piece of work, for exactly the same reasons.
Reform IP law and stop the M$/RIAA abuse.

Re:I have one already... (1)

brainspank (515274) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466388)

*sigh* /.'s attitude of "It's okay to copy anything I want" is really, really getting tiring.

who is "/." and what's his ID# ? He sounds like a whiner.

Re:I have one already... (1)

evil_tandem (767932) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466520)

"I want your product, but don't want to pay for it".

Isn't the opposite true? If no one was pirating their material they would assume the product was the problem, not the distribution. This shows that everyone doesn't hate all the products, they just want a different distribution method.

Sites like allofmp3 show that people are willing to pay you for it. The non-drm, pick-your-own-format style are what people really love. The price for such a service could be a little higher (though not $.99). These industries just currently refuse to take my money.

People have a very innate sense of value and fairness. Copying has been easy since cassettes and vhs. But people would only work so hard to get a illegitamate copy. There was a quality consideration, and at a certain point it becomes more work that the few dollars was worth to get the copy.

They just need to adjust prices for things like downloads to a place where it is no longer worth my time to spend all this time and energy getting illegal copies.

If the prices and restrictions weren't so outrageous no one would bother. I mean pirating music is still really easy and still people are buying up iTunes and allofmp3 in mass. So stop the tired old "/.'ers refuse to pay for anything". We will pay. But we won't be suckered either.

If they want better sales... (5, Insightful)

TheDunadan (950302) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465831)

...They should make better movies.

If they want better sales..then don't listen to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15465973)

I'm not certain what's so insightful about the above comment. Spend any time on BT or the other places were you can get illegal copies and you'll see that the "quality" argument is a hollow one. Here let me spell it out for you all. If the movies (or any other content for that matter) are as bad as you all claim, then BT and others would dry up naturally. I'll let all you high-IQ'ers figure out the discrepency.

Re:If they want better sales..then don't listen to (1)

Yorrike (322502) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466139)

Here's your explanation: It's fine and dandy for free, but most movies aren't worth the money they're asking. It's like the :CueCat [wikipedia.org] - no one in their right mind would actually buy one, but many millions were picked up for free, even though they were of poor quailty and worthless.

People will grab things for free that they'd never pay for. It's the hunter-gather mentality.

Re:If they want better sales..then don't listen to (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15466373)

The hole in your logic is that broadband connections nor time* are "free".

BTW Cuecat's weren't "worthless".

*Of course neither is disk drives nor CD/DVD blanks either.

Re:If they want better sales... (1)

johansalk (818687) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466214)

Better movies don't sell. Go to an arthouse cinema and you'll see better movies, but not many people, and not many arthouse cinemas. The fact is, if you want a blockbuster, it has to be stupid.

If they want better sales...insult them. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15466260)

"The fact is, if you want a blockbuster, it has to be stupid."

That's why no geeks went to see LOTR.

Re:If they want better sales... (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466531)

The last film I saw at the arthouse theater was "The Blair Witch Project."

If you'd seen the film, it'd have been the last film you saw at an arthouse theater too. "Art" movies aren't better than the big budget ones for us plebs. They don't even have better actors. They don't even have different actors. They're just cheaper.

Better Movies Don't Sell? (1)

NickFortune (613926) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466669)

Go to an arthouse cinema and you'll see better movies, but not many people, and not many arthouse cinemas.

Here's the thing though: worse movies don't sell either.We can tell this, because they've been trying it for a decade now, and all we hear about is the MPAA moaning about falling attendances and DVD sales.

Do you not think you mey be confusing "better" with here "pretentious and inaccesable and aggressively anti-populist"?

Re:If they want better sales... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15466731)

Agreed. The summary states that the distribution system is in need of a fix, but I disagree. I do like going out to see a new film at the cinema if it is going to be good & don't mind paying for the privelige. It's cheap for a night out, I will still buy a DVD to watch with friends, it's a cheap night in for hafl a dozen people.

But I won't go if there's nothing worth watching and won't buy DVD's if there's nothing worth buying; simple as that.

Re:If they want better sales... (1)

drsquare (530038) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466905)

....They should make better movies.

How will that result in better sales when Slashdot is convinced they have the right to pirate everything? Better movies will just mean more visits to the pirate bay.

The point is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15465839)

It's an interesting idea, but one that almost entirely misses the point

It needs to be free, right?

Well, I guess the obvious question is... (2, Funny)

zodiaccat (897450) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465844)

...when are we gonna start seeing book burning kiosks?

Re:Well, I guess the obvious question is... (2, Funny)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465853)

There were a few in Germany and Austria a few decades ago, but they weren't that popular in the long run. Also because they kinda lacked the value.

Re:Well, I guess the obvious question is... (1, Offtopic)

zodiaccat (897450) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465866)

It's all in how you market it, really. If you just say "book burning," people shy away. But if I was offering to "thermally reduce your books for ease of storage," it doesn't sound so bad! :D

Now where's that Offtopic mod...

Re:Well, I guess the obvious question is... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466715)

It's like the 100% compression I introduced to my coworkers a while ago. While they were quite happy with the recovered space, they didn't like the information loss that comes with it...

Damned if you do (0, Offtopic)

Cartack (628620) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465851)

Damned if you don't

Not quite.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15465862)

and all the industry has managed to do is come up with a half-baked, unpopular download service and a scant handful of simultaneous releases.

Maybe they should sue their customers into buying their stuff...

We already have these in Thailand (2, Informative)

Zemran (3101) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465867)

There nothing new here but the quality is shite.

Industry insiders describe... (2, Funny)

jeffehobbs (419930) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465875)

Industry insiders describe the kiosk prototypes they have seen as a DVD burning iMac with the browser's homepage set to "http://thepiratebay.org/ [thepiratebay.org] ". This strikes me as an mindblowingly ill-fated idea -- I mean, if I had to drive somewhere to get to the iTunes Music Store, I can't imagine I'd use it. It's all about the American I wannit now impulse.

~jeff

Re:Industry insiders describe... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15466003)

Macs work on the internet now?

Sales/attendance slumping... why? (3, Insightful)

cliffwoolley (506733) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465880)

I guess it never occurred to the movie industry that perhaps sales/attendance are slumping because all of the movies they're coming out with these days are (a) expensive and (b) exactly the same as all the other movies for the last N years? "This story line worked before, it'll work again!"

Thanks, guys. :-P

numbers (2, Interesting)

zogger (617870) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466183)

this is just my subjective impression, but it appears that the sheer numbers of new movies seems to have gone up radically over the past decade or so. There are just so many movies that people want to watch I think, I know I dont care to see so many, certainly not all of them or even close to that. Seems like a long time ago, when a new "big" movie came out it was a relatively big deal, now its like every weekend there are a dozen (whatever) new movies. Same with bands and music for that matter.

Like I said, subjective, I have no actual hard numbers to point at.

As to the kiosks, I think it could be a fine way to do it if the movie plays in anything called a DVD player and if the discs are significantly cheaper than what you get now off the shelf. The main problem is disks need to be around three bucks, not 20 dollars.

*snort* We bought some movies yesterday out weekend yard saling, I got VHS tapes three for a dollar. Thats about the only way I buy movies or music now, used and at a cheap reasonable price. At 20 bucks, I buy zero movies. Under ten dollars I start to think about it, bargain bin new 5 or under I grab a few if I feel like it.

Re:numbers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15466796)

Well maybe there's five new movies every weekend YOU want to see, but certainly not that _I_ want to see.

Movies I saw recently:
Over the Hedge (Twice)
Xmen 2

How long it had been since I had seen a movie before that:
2 months (Ice Age 2)

Before that:
4-5 months (Harry Poter)

The next movie I want to see is Cars, which will open about two weeks after XMen did.

But after that, what is there? Nacho Libre? Looks so so. Superman? Looks crappy. I may not have the opportunity to see another good movie this summer after Cars! Does Hollywood want my money or not? If they put out a film as good as Over the Hedge or Cars every week, I'd pay to go to see the things every week! Instead they put put lots and lots of crap, like GARFIELD 2, and yet ANOTHER crappy sequel to the Fast and the Furious.

Oh well at least I have Pirates and the Crarribean 2 to look forward to. That looks like it could be good. But surprise surprise, I have to wait another MONTH after cars comes out to see that.

Also, Hollywood needs to start putting these movies out on DVD when they are released and sell them to you as you walk out the door at the theatre. Cause I would have bought Over the Hedge right away. In fact, I would have bought Valiant right away, but instead I had to wait six months, and I changed my mind and now I haven't bought it, so they lost a sale. Now since I can't have Over the Hedge the legal way and it costs me $15 every time I go to see the movie in theatres I just downloaded it. They'll still get a DVD sale off me for it, but if I decide to download Valiant sometime, they probably won't get a sale from that, and they have only themselves to blame for not providing it sooner than I could get it off the net.

The Marketing department has done it again! (1)

drspliff (652992) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465884)

Ok, so have they not thought this through yet?

Instead of mass-producing a product as cheaply as possible, then charging a relatively large amount for retail purchase, they give the reproduction task to the end retailer.

To the point: cheap burnable consumer DVDs are cheap for a reason, their often crap and are rarely last as long as ones used in DVD reproduction factories.

Sure it's a nice idea, it probably looked good when the marketing guys were presenting it.. But it misses the point!

The reason we have burn-your-own and print-your-own type of services is the ability to customise what you get. In my local Kodak printing shop, I can go in with my xD/SD card, select the photos I want printed and how their scaled/cropped etc. and I'll get them a few hours later on nice glossy photo paper and a CD of all the files for backup.

At home, I burn CDs/DVDs because I can customise what I have on them, perhaps I want System of a Down mixed with Led Zeppelin (hey, it's my choice).

With this.. it's just an exact copy of the disc, not cheaper, not easier to use, will probably last considerably shorter... I can't choose if I want extra scenes, or to cut out the FBI/piracy warnings, or have the star wars theme tune dubbed over it!

And remember folks, without objective criticism we'll end up with crap products and crap ideas, and this whole thing smells of
'Yes men' and end of life product whoring.

Re:The Marketing department has done it again! (1)

countach (534280) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466022)


>To the point: cheap burnable consumer DVDs are cheap for a reason, their often crap and are
>rarely last as long as ones used in DVD reproduction factories.

That's because they are a different technology, not quality. Ones from factories are pressed so that the data is physically in the media. Burnt ones just make ink in the disk become visible.

Limitations, I dont need no stinkin' limitations (1)

Very.Zen (831087) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465888)

From TFA:
"Burning DVDs in stores could happen in 2007," he said, but noted various licensing and technology hurdles still remained.

Technology hurdles? What technology hurdles? The technology is fine, open source (and closed source) software developers have created high speed data transfer protocols, players and burner. As a previous poster said he has a movie burning kiosk in his home, there is no hurdle here.
Main problem, they wont sell the movies for £4 a disk and the only reason you ever paid more than that is for the pretty packaging and inlays, which the kiosk idea's sort of kill

Get with the program guys, stick your entire catalogue on download and charge a few quid a film, watch your market skyrocket.

Re:Limitations, I dont need no stinkin' limitation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15466642)

Well, there is a bit of a tech limitation in that for this to be any good* it has to have lots of films in it. More than you have on the shelves, obscure stuff, foreign stuff. At, say, 6 gigabytes a film you're talking either a ton of storage (easily tens of terabytes) in every shop or a ton of bandwidth - gigabit at a minimum, because no-one wants to wait more than a minute.
This is technically possible, right now, but the technology isn't good enough yet for this to be cheap. If Bob's Family DVD Store has to spend £10000 on hardware they'll pass that cost on to consumers, and the scheme ends up being more expensive than just shipping real DVDs around.
Now, the really interesting thing is online retailers! You're already waiting 3 days for the film, so there's no reason they can't burn it themselves. Amazon could definitely get cheaper.

*probably not their aim, but lets run with it

Here's what I would buy (4, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465894)

I currently have a movie rental subscription. It costs £13/month, and gives me as many DVDs as I can watch, up to three at a time. This works out to about one a day. I would pay a similar amount, maybe a little more (say, £15) for the convenience of a service that offered:
  1. DVD-quality downloads. 1GB of H.264-encoded movie should give 'good enough' quality.
  2. No DRM; I often watch films on my laptop, and I occasionally watch them on a handheld device. Don't tie me to any particular platform.
  3. Any film or TV series that's been released on DVD.
  4. Up to 30 downloads a month.
Sure, some people would archive everything they've downloaded, but would the industry lose much from that? I rarely watch a film more than two or three times, and so it wouldn't make much sense; particularly when you can just re-download any film you want.

Of course, these films would also end up on peer to peer networks, but at that price it just wouldn't be worth my time and effort to get them illegally.

I don't want any more DVDs. I own fifty or so movies on DVD, but I stopped buying new ones over a year ago. They are simply not worth the money; when I can rent close to thirty for the price of buying one it's only a good investment to buy if I plan on watching it more than thirty times[1].

Sadly, I don't think the movie industry is likely to adopt such a model for quite some time.


[1] The opposite is true for music. Looking through my iTunes library, the vast majority of tracks have a play count of 50-80, making music rental services a very bad financial choice for me.

Re:Here's what I would buy (2, Insightful)

justthinkit (954982) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466028)

With NetFlix, the "one DVD a day" turned out to be a bad dream. The reality was more like one every two days. The other big problem was they didn't have every DVD I wanted to watch. Amazon does but it takes a week to get it. A rare-movie-burned-while-I-wait sounds like a niche-filler to me -- bring it on.

Re:Here's what I would buy (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466857)

How do you keep people honest? Seriously, I know the MPAA is dishonest, but they are made up of people, and my experience is that most people are dishonest at least on occasion if they think they can get away with something.

I really don't see the benefit of your suggested program from the MPAA perspective.

I don't see what the problem with music rental services as they exist, for the cost of less than album a month you get access to a few million tracks. If you spent that much in your lifetime on CDs, that would be less than 10k songs that you would eventually buy and you get the opportunity to sample music that you wouldn't have risked buying a CD.

Niche markets? (1)

PontifexPrimus (576159) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465901)

I could imagine that, if done right, it could appeal to niche markets; say, if people would like a film that hasn't seen a DVD run yet (for instance some of the older stuff from the 50s or 60s - great monster flicks) or would like a certain language version that is not normally stocked.
And while we're on the subject of desirables: why should those kiosks just mirror the inventory of the store (which is what the articles seem to imply)? Make it so you can "order up" obscure movies or create compilations and have them ready for burning the next day. In this case I'd see an added value that would make the idea worth implementing, but I fear that in reality those burning stations will only "stock" the latest blockbusters to catch the sales usually lost when a hot selling disk is temporarily out of stock...

Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15465912)

(Warning: possible anti-Slashdot-mentality post)

Frankly, I don't understand what's the deal with amassing all those movies. I'd be much happier with a pay-per-view scheme, and a fast net connection through which I could download the movies in DVD quality (I'm on 512 kbps right now, and strongly doubt I can get something better for an affordable price in the next half a decade).

I don't consider myself to be an atypical person; for the vast majority of people, stacking-up movies is a silly idea. How often do you find yourself watching something you've already seen? I know I do it once every leap year, and I honestly don't know anyone else who does it more often. I could probably count on one hand the number of movies I'm interested in watching again in a couple of years (but chances are, I'll see the movie on some TV channel in the meantime, for free). Why watch something old when you can watch something new?

Likewise with music. I know plenty of people who have mp3 collections closely approaching 100 GB. When asked why, they respond with "I like having them", on the assumption that they'll be interested in hearing a particular album one day... Which, of course, almost never happens. Even people with hundreds of CD's rarely resort to wiping off dust from something they bought years ago. You have a new favourite album, you listen to it ten times in a month, and it's very likely you won't come back to it in years. By that time, the CD might already be corrupt.

So instead of giving us the option to permanently store music/movies, why not offer CHEAP (I mean, really cheap) playback? If I'm in the mood for listening to Foobar's "Baz Quux", give me the entire album for $1, pack it up in insane DRM, and let me listen to it once. Just once, for $1. I assure you, if it's a masterpiece album, I'll go out and buy it on CD for $25 to support the artist, but for the love of God, don't install rootkits on my PC and let me rip that CD to my iPod, iriver or Creative.

Give me a play-once movie for $2.5 (because I can rent it cheaper on DVD in the store down the block, but it's raining and I can't be arsed to go out).

When you do all that, don't be surprised with higher profits. The people aren't criminals and would gladly pay for music and movies, but you, the industry, just fail to see the big market with people who aren't interested in owning those things. You operate under false assumptions that you need to drive prices up because everyone wants a copy to share with their friends.

The answer (1)

jonwil (467024) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465916)

Hollywood needs to offer movies & TV shows for download.
They need to be:
1.Available (one big reason people pirate, especially for TV shows, is because they cant watch it legally). This includes making stuff that is not currently cost-effective to put onto DVD and distributing and marketing and etc available (the costs of putting all those old TV shows that you just cant get anymore onto an online download service would probobly be negligable other than the inital one-off cost to digitize the shows into a digital master format)
2.Cheap (how cheap depends on how they compare quality/features/extras/etc wise to buying the DVD). Especially what is needed is the abillity to buy single episodes of a TV show (but by the same token, buying a whole season or the whole series should be cheaper than buying each episode seperatly)
3.Non-restrictive (This doesnt necessarily mean DRM free, what it does mean is that it has to be something one can burn onto a DVD or load over a network link or something and watch in full quality on the big expensive home theater setups and NOT something limited to watching on your PC (or iPod for that matter)
4.World-wide (making it US only wont help all the people in other parts of the world downloading from BitTorrent because they cant get the content locally)
and 5.Free of crap. If its ad-supported, it better be free (or very close to it). If it costs money, it should be free of ads, anti-piracy messages, anti-fast-forward locks etc etc.

Disks are so passe (1)

troll -1 (956834) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465925)

Before you jump in your SUV and drive 15 miles to that burning kiosk, check out gnutella [gnutelliums.com] .

The movie industry needs to realize the horse and buggy distro system has been superceded by an Internet. Funny plastic disks are mostly unecessary.

First Amendment issue: (3, Funny)

LiftOp (637065) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465951)

Can I shout "fire!" in a movie burning kiosk?

Uh but... (2, Interesting)

countach (534280) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465954)

But "burned" DVDs have a limited life. They may only last a few years depending on the quality of the DVDs etc. Properly pressed DVDs last nearly forever. How happy will the consumers be when a few years down the track the DVDs stop working?

DVD cannibalising the industry? (2, Interesting)

thelamecamel (561865) | more than 8 years ago | (#15465958)

DVD is certainly having a negative impact on cinemagoing. There are certainly times when you want to go out and see a movie, but in many (most?) cases the difference between watching the movie at home or at a cinema is decreasing. Therefore more people are buying DVDs, and fewer people are going to cinemas.

Whenever I go to a cinema (unfortunately rarely these days), I am subjected to trailers which often show me really cool movies that I then want to go to see. So if I go to one movie, chances are I'll go to a few more in the next few weeks. I'm sure that i'm not alone here (and the advertising industry hopes i'm not too!)

But there aren't compulsory trailers on DVDs (and if there were i would get very pissed off and boycott the DVDs concerned), and so audiences aren't exposed to future movies that they might like. So they are then less likely to continue seeing as many more movies.

How can the movie industry fix this? More, better advertising on TV perhaps. More trailers on DVDs (though if you make these unskippable you WILL piss people off and they'll rent less DVDs because of the annoyance). But the best strategy, if it is possible, is to entice the public back to watching movies at the cinema, probably by lowering prices. Then they'll want to keep seeing more movies at the cinema if the movie's good enough, or otherwise on DVD.

Re:DVD cannibalising the industry? (2, Funny)

isecore (132059) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466011)

But there aren't compulsory trailers on DVDs (and if there were i would get very pissed off and boycott the DVDs concerned), and so audiences aren't exposed to future movies that they might like. So they are then less likely to continue seeing as many more movies.

True, but instead we get non-skippable "informational" commercials calling us pirates and sprouting corporate bullshit about how pirates are not only evil, but also communists.

Re:DVD cannibalising the industry? (1)

MrBandersnatch (544818) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466020)

Price really isnt the problem for a lot of people. I'll happily shell out £30-£50 for an enjoyable experience. The problem is that going to the cinema often ISNT one. Overpriced and poor quality food and drinks, poor leg-room, poor access to toilet facilities, obstructed views and sound...really the last time I enjoyed a trip to the cimema I was 20 and had a gorgeous young lass on my arm who provided far more entertainment than the film!

Seriously, as far as Im concerned "cinema" is dead and the only films Im likely to watch are on my *home* cinema system...if Hollywood wants any more money out of me than they currently get with my Sky+ and DVD rental subscription they either need to change the Cinema experience to either be a lot more pleasurable (I cant see them providing a young lass for me....and besides my wife might object!), exclusive (WTF cant I book a private booth with its own sound system?) or work out a way to get more money out of me from home. Which downloads would do....

Re:DVD cannibalising the industry? (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466082)

DVD is certainly having a negative impact on cinemagoing.

Except for the cinema owners the industry doesn't give a damn about cinema going, they care about sales. That's the whole point (in their minds) of these kiosks, to drive sales.

Selling DVDs doesn't "canabalize" the industry. In fact, home video reviltalized it with rental sales and direct to video releases.

The point, if you read the blurb, is that sales are down across the board, including home video.

Somehow or other the dim bulbs have gotten the idea that downloading is what is hurting sales, so it is downloading that people want, so it is downloading that they will offer in the stores.

Who gives a shit whether the movie was downloaded or not?

Nobody. That's who.

The relevant fact is that downloading goes in in the home. People don't want to go out.

KFG

Re:DVD cannibalising the industry? (1)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466190)

Closed, bunker-style homes that people don't want to go out from are not socially healthy.

But anyway, lean over that keyboard for a bit now, and 'reach out' with your opinion. Perhaps the fat-and-lazy market is that important.
   

Why will you do this? And why will stores? (1)

Seven Sided Snowflak (930879) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466006)

You'll do this because you'll be in the store buying something else, realize that you have nothing to watch tonight, think of something you want to see, and buy a disc. Cheap, easy, legal, quick.

Stores will do this because while you're waiting for the disc to burn, you'll be doing the rest of your shopping. Maybe you'd planned to run in for one item, but now you're hanging around for 20 minutes, and more likely to think of something else you'll need.

Re:Why will you do this? And why will stores? (1)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466153)

You'll do this because you'll be in the store buying something else, realize that you have nothing to watch tonight, think of something you want to see, and buy a disc. Cheap, easy, legal, quick.

And doesn't involve downloading anywhere in the equation.

In point of fact it won't work like that, because you don't impulse buy because you think of something. You don't think of something you hadn't already intended to buy.

I have one DVD that I bought on impulse, because I saw it in the cheapy bin at the grocery store.

Didn't have to hang around another 20 minutes waiting for it download and burn either. That woulda killed the deal deader than shit. I just grabbed it on my way to the checkout and then went home.

KFG

Too early for slashdot (1)

sammyo (166904) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466017)

My first thought at the headline was: some software glitch
caused one of those cheesie web kiosks to catch on fire?

Cool.

A Brief, Feeble Defense of an Execrable Idea (2, Interesting)

Crash Culligan (227354) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466142)

The motion picture industry's line of thinking (if it can be called that) probably ran something like this:

  • Problem: People aren't paying for movies, either to see them in the theaters or for DVDs.
  • Observation: There are honest people out there that will pay for the media, as well as people who are almost ready to do so if only it were more convenient.
  • Solution: Make it more convenient. If people go see the movie and like it, they can buy a freshly burned copy in the lobby afterwards and take the experience home with them.

I'll agree, the idea is an interesting one. And if circumstances were different, I could see it taking off. There are already bands which record the concert live and then sell CDs after the concert. That seems to work fairly well. So yes, there could have been a chance for this model. (I did say that this would be a brief, feeble defense, yes?)

Now, where does this idea really fall flat? Well, the problem as stated is pretty much accurate. (It's solely their problem, but technically, to them, it is a problem.) Although, parsed through the lens of objectivity their problem actually reads, "People aren't paying enough for our movies." Meaning that making money hand-over-fist isn't enough for them, they want to make more money, both hands over three fists, damnit.

The observation is also correct: if the need is great enough and the item is unique enough, there will be someone honest enough to pay nearly any price. (As a corollary, there will also be someone crooked enough to never pay for the thing if there's any chance at all of getting it cheaper or for free elsewhere.) The sales rate to product going out may approach, but will never reach, either 0% or 100%.

I see the biggest problem in the solution, because they're providing a convenient sales mechanism for people who are already using this other sales mechanism, both of which are tanking in the marketplace! If the problem is people not buying DVDs or going to see movies, tying the two of them together is silly! It's like trying to build a flying machine by tying two bricks together.

I could also launch into a diatribe on the cost/benefit analysis of piracy vs. purchasing, but this isn't the place.

Don't give us half-baked distribution models... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15466295)

... give us quality movies instead. Your profits aren't down because of piracy, they're down because the quality isn't there. Phoned-in remakes of remakes aren't enough to draw the masses off their couches, it's time Hollywood pulled their heads out of the sand and shifted their focus from yammering about "nobody loves us anymore" to offering quality entertainment. Give us something to watch, dammit!

And might the exhorbitant ticket prices at the local megaplexes have something to do with declining attendance too, hmmmm? Just a thought...

ideal for rentals (1)

froody (115836) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466300)

My biggest complaint with renting DVDs is that they're often so scratched that they skip, or not play at all. Having the rental place reburn a DVD from scratch every 5 rentals (or whatever) would solve that problem nicely and cheaply. (I did some back-of-the-envelope calculations at http://www.casualhacker.net/blog/2006/03/dvd-renta ls/ [casualhacker.net] .) I didn't think the studios would go for it, but maybe they will.

Tim

What are movies and why would kiosks sell them? (1)

lingoman (793455) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466310)

After surveying the couple hundred cable channels I have, and after thinking back several years to the last time I was in a movie threater, I submit that more than 90% of them are:

  • The things making the most noise in large, cold, damp, cavernous rooms with sticky floors, crowded with obnoxious pre-teenagers.
  • Animated soap operas in which misunderstood pre-teens suffer but live happily ever after.
  • Something of utmost importance to national security which must be protected at all cost against Chinese pirates and radical file-sharers.
  • When the characters are over 18, softcore porn depicting impossible positions with acrobatic body doubles.
  • Advertising opportunities for Coke, Pepsi and Apple, and several other brand names.

Huh? (1)

Rydia (556444) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466376)

If you want to editorialize and generalize, write an editorial and submit it. Lord knows /. has enough random people with blogs as news. Don't write a mini-editorial in the submission of a real story, because it's dishonest and, to be frank, quite lame.

"Burning Kiosks"? (1)

rakanishu (670638) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466385)

I missed this movie "Burning Kiosks". I can't seem to find it in IMDB. When did it come out, and why are we talking about it on /.?

Better idea (2)

aquabat (724032) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466461)

If they want to increase their market share, the movie companies should take that share away from other media, for example, the print media. To that end, I propose that they set up book burning kiosks in video stores world wide.

A good idea if (1)

fermion (181285) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466480)

I think this will be a good idea if the major studios are willig to put forward a significant capital investment and then allow the stores to burn the movies they please, as long they collect a standard royalty, to be paid to the content holder, not the owner of the kiosk.

Here is what I was thinking. There are a fair number of movies that are not being served by the DVD market. Either they are not going to sell enough to justify the cost to press, or will not move enough in the stores to justify the space, or are older content and not even worth the cost to remaaster. However, a 3-4 terabyte server for each store, along with several burning stations, is not incredible costly, or space consuming and would hold maybe 1000 movies. Other content could be downloaded on demand. This would allow increased sales in stores, and increased profit, especially on old libraries.

For this the studios would have to play nice. Since there is little cost to produce these, or the cost of keeping stock, they need to keep the prices down to $10. Again, the burning kiosk should not be for movies that do well on DVD, but to push the back library. Second, no unskippable conent. I just bought another CD with 10 minutes of previews that I could not skip. It realy made me wonder why I did not just download the damn thing.

I am sure the major studios will screw this up just as they have the digital projector. Anything like this lossens their grip on distribution, and further weakens their market share. If done right, it will allow the studio a cost effective way to push content and compete with the majors. I am sure this will not be allowed.

Re:A good idea if (1)

coffeechica (948145) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466615)

Of course they'll not allow it. If they can charge $10 for one DVD, then tehy can also charge $15, can't they? And of course a service fee, because it's a convenience they offer. Plus the blank DVD, because you can't expect them to supply that for free (and don't you dare bring a cheap one with you, it won't be accepted.)

By this time the customer has wandered off to either order the DVD online, buy it in the DVD store next door, or downloaded it. And the studios will have one more piece of proof that the consumers are inherently evil and that they don't accept their legal distribution methods, but will download no matter how conveniently they could get a legal DVD.

this will mean lots of trouble (0, Flamebait)

AlgorithMan (937244) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466537)

lets say I buy/rent such a burned dvd... and I don't keep the bill...
now lets say the police raids my house - how the hell am I supposed to prove that this burned dvd is legal?

I'll have to pay hundreds of euros fine and maybe go to prison, because I legally bought/rented dvds... NO THANK YOU!

I am salivating... (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466603)

Imagining coming to Wal-mart and burning Zabriskie Point for $14.99...

Yeah, right...

They did it to themselves. (1)

Phybersyk0 (513618) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466795)

I have no remorse for Hollywood's money woes.


Hollywood's movie distribution system is in dire need of a fix.

Actually -- it's not. Unless you have no retailer and no internet access to purchase DVD's, the distribution system works.

Movie attendance has been suffering.

If you're a single person going to a theatre spending US$8.50 for entry, $4.00 for a medium drink, $5.00 for a box of candy or nachos, one person might be able to handle it. Now, imagine being a family of four and doing all that?

In all though, I perceive no apparent problem with attendance. I saw MI:3 in Raleigh, NC yesterday and the theatre was full. I watched both DaVinci Code and X-Men:3 last weekend in St. Louis, MO and the seats were full there as well.

DVD sales are slumping.

I like movies. No, I LOVE movies. I've got nearly 400 DVD's in my collection that I'm slowly starting to sell because of HD-DVD disks already being sold here in North Carolina for the price of about US$30.00.
I've bought, sold, replaced, sold, and replaced so many titles in my collection that I'd begun to give up.

It's the studio's problem that they rush discs to market just a couple months after a films release and then a year later offer the "extended, uncut super-freakout end-all be all version". Then a year after that they release the same disk but some action figure, or bonus disc or Oscar edition.

THEY dilluted the market. They had people like me willing to invest hard-earned cash into building a "respectable" movie collection (amongst officianados) and pissed it away.

If they really want to change things, release the "movie-only" version through the cable companies. Offer a set-top box that has a smart card linked to an account that registers customer purchases and allows people to OWN ACCESS TO THE CONTENT WITHOUT HAVING TO PURCHASE A PHYSICAL ITEM.

A person should then be able to LEND his smart card to a friend or take it with him to another customer's house and watch the same LICENSED film if he chooses.

Two people cannot watch the same purchase simultaneously in two different locations, and the studios will be able to obtain metrics on who's watching what and WHERE.

But for the real FANS OF FILM offer the super-freakout edition in the stores or for online purchase. Stop fucking it up for us. You're double-dipping. You're cheating us.

For those of us who BUY physical products give us a central registry so that we can be afforded REPLACEMENT of our discs when things go awry. We send in the old-dead disc, you send us back a shiny new one.

I think that for $30.00 per title you can do this with little effort.

What? (1)

The-Bus (138060) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466883)

"Movie attendance has been suffering, DVD sales are slumping..."

I thought movie attendance had actually picked up this year over last. Maybe not a huge increase, but it's not "suffering" --- and DVD sales are not slumping. Their rate of increase has been slowing down, but that's a measure of acceleration, not speed or distance.

This'll hopefully help digital downloads (1)

joeykiller (119489) | more than 8 years ago | (#15466888)

None of the digital movie download services I know of lets the user download the movie and then burn it to DVD. Apparently this has to do with CSS and burnable DVDs (you can't encrypt or encrypt properly burned DVDs). The last I heard of this was that there was work on a new version of CSS that would let you burn DVDs yourself, but that there might be compatibility issues with older DVD players. [In the meantime the porn industry chose its own encryption format [go.com] which apparently works with existing players.]

Does this kiosk development mean that the new version of CSS is ready? If so DVD burning could be available for online digital download services as well. As I see it they're held back by the simple fact that connecting a computer to a TV is not as easy as putting a DVD into the player.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?