Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Disney Close To Unveiling New "DVD Killer"

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the plays-for-sure dept.

Media 498

Uncle Rummy writes "The Wall Street Journal reports that Disney is close to releasing a new system that will sell permanent, multi-device access to digital media. The system, dubbed Keychest, is being positioned as an answer to consumer concerns about purchasing digital media that are locked to a small number of devices, and thus as a way to finally shift media sales from an ownership model to an access model. They claim that such a service would reduce the risk of losing access to content as a result of a single vendor going out of business, as purchased content would remain available from other vendors. However, they do not seem to have addressed the question of what happens to customers' access to purchased content if the Keychest service itself is discontinued."

cancel ×

498 comments

Can I avoid this simply by avoiding Disney? (5, Insightful)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827547)

I mean, does the solution here have to be complicated?

Re:Can I avoid this simply by avoiding Disney? (5, Funny)

TheMeuge (645043) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827651)

In order to provide the most choice, freedom, and protection for consumers, use of Keychest will become mandatory.

Re:Can I avoid this simply by avoiding Disney? (0, Flamebait)

rnturn (11092) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827823)

``In order to provide the most choice, freedom, and protection for consumers''

You crack me up. You really do if you think Disney is proposing this for the "consumer's" benefit. Perhaps you merely forgot to include the "sarcasm" tags?

Re:Can I avoid this simply by avoiding Disney? (2, Insightful)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827847)

*WHOOSH* did you forget your own sarcasm detector?

welcome to slashdot.

Re:Can I avoid this simply by avoiding Disney? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29827903)

Holy Zen! How could you miss the irony:

In order to provide the most choice, freedom, and protection for consumers, use of Keychest will become mandatory.

Seriously, you need to get a sarcasm detector.

Re:Can I avoid this simply by avoiding Disney? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29828017)

I'd ask if you're new here, but your UID suggests you may be one of the original bearded ones.

Re:Can I avoid this simply by avoiding Disney? (5, Funny)

camperdave (969942) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828073)

I'd ask if you're new here, but your UID suggests you may be one of the original bearded ones.

It's amazing what you can buy on eBay these days.

Re:Can I avoid this simply by avoiding Disney? (5, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827679)

I mean, does the solution here have to be complicated?

For you, no. All you have to do is 1) purchase the DVD (or whatever), 2) rip it to a hard drive, 3) transcode to whatever format the playing device will accept (MPEG, AVI, MP3, whatever 4) transfer it to the device 5) enjoy 6) Backup original so you don't lose or destroy it. Repeat as desired.

For Mush-for-Brains average consumer - it might be a bit much to expect. Hence, other ideas.

Re:Can I avoid this simply by avoiding Disney? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29827687)

Our vision for the future is that consumers won't have to think about where they bought [a movie], how they bought it, or when they bought it," says Mr. Chapek.

My vision of the future is that I won't have to think about where I downloaded a movie, how I downloaded it, or when I downloaded it. ...oh wait, we've got distributed hash tables already. Never mind.

Re:Can I avoid this simply by avoiding Disney? (1)

schon (31600) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827831)

Our vision for the future is that consumers won't have to think about where they bought [a movie], how they bought it, or when they bought it," says Mr. Chapek.

So.. their vision for the future is exactly the way it is right now?

Because I'm pretty sure "consumers" don't do any of that with DVDs.

Re:Can I avoid this simply by avoiding Disney? (1)

GIL_Dude (850471) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827905)

Correct, my only problems are "where did I put it?" or "did I forget to bring it?". Who cares where I bought it? (Wal-Mart, Amazon, etc.) Who cares how I bought it? (online, credit card, cash, brick and mortar, etc.) And I sure don't think anyone would care when I bought it. (Tuesday, during a sale, etc.).

Pretty clear that they aren't doing anything for my benefit here unless they are going to solve the "where did I put it" and the "did I forget to bring it" without adding a bunch of DRM.

Some consumers do... (2, Informative)

Roger W Moore (538166) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827925)

Because I'm pretty sure "consumers" don't do any of that with DVDs.

Some consumers do. For example I have to remember that when I buy a DVD in the UK I cannot play it in my Canadian DVD player wen I get home....at least not without ripping it and rewriting it first.

DisneyRM(tm) (2, Interesting)

TiggertheMad (556308) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827987)

I agree with the parent. I trust the Disney corporation about as much as SCO or anyone involved in investment banking. I completely distrust DRM schemes, and anyone involved in them. Why would I want anything to do with some stupid plan Disney has for wringing a few more bucks out of consumers?

This press release is irritating me to no end. I'm going home to pirate a few crappy Disney films out of general spite.

Re:Can I avoid this simply by avoiding Disney? (4, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827997)

I seriously doubt this will be a DVD killer, and Disney isn't likely to stop selling DVDs unless everybody else does, too. And it's incredibly stupid on the MAFIAA's part; most slashdotters would happily get rid of physical media, but even here you see lots of folks saying they don't want an ebook reader, they want real books.

Most people, when they buy something, want to own it. Downloaded media is rental. I want to be able to sell or loan my stuff; when I buy something, I want to BUY something. I don't buy movies, I buy DVDs. I don't buy music, I buy CDs.

From TFA: could contribute to a shift in what it means for a consumer to own a movie or a TV show, by redefining ownership as access rights, not physical possession.

To paraphrase Shakespeare, a turd by any other name would stink as badly. Access rights are NOT ownership. If you rent a house you have access rights, but you don't own it. I own my CDs and DVD's. They're mone and I can do with them as I wish. Not so with "access rights".

Are the world's liars remaking the English language these days?

Pixels for the SuperBowl... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29827549)

CollectiveCommercial.Com [collectivecommercial.com]

Tomorrow's ./ headline - (4, Funny)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827569)

MPAA sues Disney over new "DVD Killer"

Re:Tomorrow's ./ headline - (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29827839)

Actually, its /. not ./

Re:Tomorrow's ./ headline - (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827863)

Unless he meant yesterday's headline not tomorrow's ...

Out of Business? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29827601)

Or what if Disney itself goes out of business?

If I buy it as a DVD as it is now, I don't have to worry about vendors, like Best Buy, to go out of business.

Why try "fix" something that isn't broken? What they need to fix is their prices. Maybe if it was cheaper and worth buying, people wouldn't copy so much?

Re:Out of Business? (4, Insightful)

Red Flayer (890720) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827763)

Or what if Disney itself goes out of business?

Hahahahahahaha! Hah!

If Disney goes out of business, you'll have more important things to worry about, like the collapse of civilization as we know it.

Disney isn't going anywhere, not when they have the backing of the US government (among others) to ensure that you, citizen, can only watch/read/listen to items if you pay the Disney tax (for things that should have been in the public domain decades ago).

The DVDs you have purchased will wear out long before Disney is dead and gone.

Why try "fix" something that isn't broken? What they need to fix is their prices. Maybe if it was cheaper and worth buying, people wouldn't copy so much?

Why do that, when they can just make sure that people are punished for copying? Make it not worth the risk to copy.

Re:Out of Business? (5, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827945)

Why do that, when they can just make sure that people are punished for copying? Make it not worth the risk to copy.

How do you plan on doing that? The risk of getting caught is infinitesmial, so in order for the expected payoff to be negative you would need enormous fines. Even larger than the 80,000 per track Jammie Thomas faces. And still, people would keep copying in the expectation that "it could never happen to me".

The only other option is to make it much harder to copy by locking down our general purpose computing hardware, which would destroy the US's technological advantage.

Neither of these cases are at all sustainable. We do not need an unwinnable "war on copyright violation" in the vein of the "war on drugs". The only sensible solution is to understand that the world has changed, and that some business models are not viable anymore.

Re:Out of Business? (5, Funny)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827783)

what if Disney itself goes out of business?

Then all is lost. You will be too busy fighting for daily survival - trying to outwit gangs of bandits, scrounging or stealing whatever scraps of food you can find, amputating your own gangrenous limb using nothing but rusty garden tools - to think about movies or entertainment of any kind.

Re:Out of Business? (4, Insightful)

v1 (525388) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827915)

Or what if Disney itself goes out of business?

Highly unlikely.

BUT the point is valid. Everyone that has ever hawked centralized-server-drm says that they could never possibly go out of business. A few say they'll release a tool to unlock all the content if they go under. To my knowledge, no tool has ever been released in such a case, and there are over a dozen large examples of such companies going out of business or simply shutting down their activation servers, turning purchased content into useless bits.

"There oughtta be a law". That says DRM is only legal if the universal unlocker is kept in escrow somewhere (and kept updated) with terms to go public with it if they ch7,9,11,etc or simply shut off their servers.

Re:Out of Business? (1)

Steauengeglase (512315) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827975)

Too big too fail and the nation needs it's Roadhouse when TBS isn't playing it.

Tyranny by another name... (2, Informative)

neurogeneticist (1631367) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827603)

So basically this is not permanent at all, just subject to the whims of yet another overlord.

Re:Tyranny by another name... (1)

FooAtWFU (699187) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827749)

If Disney promised to send you a physical DVD (or whatever-media-is-popular-these-days) whenever you wanted to cancel your account or if they decided to discontinue the service, would that address your concerns?

Re:Tyranny by another name... (2, Insightful)

IndustrialComplex (975015) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828025)

More important question:

Would Disney ever promise that?

Re:Tyranny by another name... (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828027)

Only if the agreement was such that if they decided not to send me a RedRay disc in 2025 they would be forced to return any money I ever spent with their program.

Promises not backed by punishments mean nothing.

The article even says so (2, Informative)

Roger W Moore (538166) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828071)

Yes - it even says so in the article:

And Keychest would allow movie studios to dictate how many devices, connected to which distribution networks, a given title can be played on.

So it is permanent for as long as they say it is permanent.

The reason Keychest service will survive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29827617)

It will be backed by Flooz.

Some non-copyrighted character's nose is growing.

didn't DIVX already solve this problem?!!!! (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827855)

I don't understand what you're getting at... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinnochio [wikipedia.org]

Disney sells product that solves Disney's problem. (5, Insightful)

gurps_npc (621217) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827631)

They continue to try and convince the world that THEIR problem is actually the world's problem. No. People LIKE owning. We don't like 'accessing'. If I want to own a movie, I pay the cost to watch it no more than 3 times. If I want to 'access' a movie with a huge screen and fantastic sound, then I go to a theater and pay less than 1/3 that cost. If you want to charge for access instead of ownership, without the enhanced screen and audio, then you have to charge a lot less than ownership. If Disney's new system is going to be priced like ownership, no one will use it.

Re:Disney sells product that solves Disney's probl (3, Insightful)

OscarGunther (96736) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827717)

I saw the WSJ article on this. The only thing it solves is the problem of storing large media files on low-capacity hardware. In all other respects, it's an industry solution in search of a consumer problem. Given a comprehensive set of easily-followed instructions on how to convert and load media files on different platforms (PCs, phones, etc.), this "solution" solves nothing for me. If I'm sufficiently technically savvy to convert a movie so it will play on my iPod, why do I need this?

Re:Disney sells product that solves Disney's probl (1)

Malc (1751) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827953)

1) You're in a minority, being technically savvy enough, and being willing to go through that effort

2) This should be easier and faster than ripping yourself. The masses want simplicity and convenience.

Re:Disney sells product that solves Disney's probl (3, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827835)

I don't particularly like owning films. I own quite a lot, but I haven't bought many in the last few years (and those only from charity shops when the DVDs were really cheap). They take up a lot of space, and I don't watch them very often. I rent a lot more. There are few films I want to watch more than once, or maybe twice, and, given the choice, I would much rather watch a new film than one I've seen before.

And that is Disney's real problem. The thing that they have of value is the ability to produce new films. They need to stop fixating on trying to sell copies of their films and focus on how to persuade people to pay them to make new films. That is the kind of innovation the industry needs, not new forms of DRM.

Re:Disney sells product that solves Disney's probl (4, Insightful)

Cro Magnon (467622) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828155)

And that is Disney's real problem. The thing that they have of value is the ability to produce new films. They need to stop fixating on trying to sell copies of their films and focus on how to persuade people to pay them to make new films. That is the kind of innovation the industry needs, not new forms of DRM.

DOES Disney create new films? I thought they just recyled stuff that was already out there, tweaked it a bit, then released it as "Disney's 666th film". The last truly original thing they did involved a cute, but very elderly by now, mouse, and a duck with a speech problem.

Re:Disney sells product that solves Disney's probl (2, Informative)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827907)

Nonsense! Just look what a roaring success [wikipedia.org] Circuit City had with this "They don't really want to own it" model.

Re:Disney sells product that solves Disney's probl (3, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827991)

See personally, I disagree. Part of my problem with current online digital media is that they're focusing on "owning" rather than "accessing". Take iTunes, for example. I can "buy" a season of a particular show, but I can't just pay to watch it once. Not only does "buying" theoretically increase the price to watch a show once that I'll probably only want to watch once, but it also puts me on the hook to store and maintain a copy. Sure, I can throw it away if I really only want to watch it once, but then I've payed "buying" price for a "rental".

Personally, I wouldn't mind paying for most TV shows and movies per-viewing, so long as it was cheap and I had the option to buy. Further, what I'd really like to do is buy free access to downloads in perpetuity, regardless of new/improved formats. What I mean is, I might actually be convinced to spend $20 on a movie on iTunes if I knew that I could re-download it whenever I wanted (if the original file was lost or deleted), and that if they release it in 1080p in a couple of years I could download that copy, too. And then if they released it in whatever replaced 1080p, I could get that free too. That would be my preference as a consumer, that they quit trying to force me to re-buy the same movie over and over again.

Still, I would agree that they're really trying to solve their own problem instead of the consumer's problem. The "consumer concerns about purchasing digital media that are locked to a small number of devices" is entirely caused by two things: selling less-than-ideal quality versions so they can sell you better versions later, and locking users in with DRM. I know everyone knows what I'm talking about with DRM, but movie studios are selling DVD quality movies on iTunes even after the Bluray has been released. Hell, there are even cases where they'll let you rent the 720p version (meaning it's on Apple's server) but will only let you buy the DVD-quality. And that's only 720p. Why should I spend $20 on a 720p version when I know a 1080p version exists and there's no predefined upgrade path.

Re:Disney sells product that solves Disney's probl (2, Insightful)

Cheapy (809643) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827995)

Unfortunately...that's not quite true. Steam, and especially Valve's games, have done quite well, despite the customer not owning the game.

Re:Disney sells product that solves Disney's probl (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29828081)

THANK YOU! That's exactly how I feel. Sell me a physical piece of media and leave me alone!

I want some... (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827639)

... of whatever Disney is smoking!

Re:I want some... (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828055)

Smoking? Nah, to quote a character in one of their movies (Who Framed Roger Rabbit), "Too many refrigerators dropped on his head".

So, "any device" means... (3, Insightful)

Kenja (541830) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827645)

So, "any device" means anything running a supported OS with supported software and access to their cloud.

Which means any device other then something I would want to use to watch a movie while on an airplane. More or less the same problem I have with current "digital copy included!" DVDs on the market. They don't actually work with anything I want to use.

Keychest vs. the Vault (2, Interesting)

BryanL (93656) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827653)

This coming from a company that puts movies in the vault for a decade to increase demand. How do they reconcile the two philosophies? Maybe it's a case of the right hand not knowing what the left is doing, but the cynical side of me thinks they are counting on new file formats (.avi->.dis) being introduced in the future that will not be compatible with Keychest. In any case, Disney thinking in the best interest of the customer does not seem to be what is happening here.

Re:Keychest vs. the Vault (1)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827747)

I don't see any conflict between the business models. I mean, if you bought a Disney DVD, and then they stopped selling that movie for a decade, as long as your DVD isn't damaged, you can keep watching the video forever, right? But, *other people* cannot obtain copies.

So, with Keychest, if you bought it, you got it, but if you didn't buy it while it was out, you have to wait another decade to buy it when it goes on sale again? It's not like "The Vault" *removes* your access, currently, to already purchased content.

However, that said, I could totally see Disney trying to move to a model, using this digital platform, where you only have temporary access to the media. I'm sure they'd love that idea. We'll see.

Re:Keychest vs. the Vault (1)

BryanL (93656) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827927)

In my lifetime I have seen Disney go from Theater->TV->VHS->DVD->Digital as their major source of income. Disney, like most/all media companies rely on format changes over time. Putting movies in the vault for a decade is a stall tactic for the next media format, where, they hope, people will buy the movie multiple times. I am skeptical that Disney (or any media company) would choose a permanent format for their customers to use forever. Unless they are planning on the internet disappearing in the next decade people will "own" digital files for a long time to come. Unless they are planning on 3D hologram devices in 10-15 years that project a table-top movie, I can't see how they are going to bleed their customers in the next cycle.

No Problem! (1)

Petersko (564140) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828007)

"This coming from a company that puts movies in the vault for a decade to increase demand. How do they reconcile the two philosophies?"

It's simple. Anything worth a shit you get to access one year in ten. You do, however, have the right and ability to watch Chicken Little as many times as you want for as long as their servers operate.

So, basically, this is Steam for movies? (2, Insightful)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827659)

This sounds pretty much exactly like Valve's Steam service, extended to other forms of entertainment. Seems like a lot of people have little problem with Steam, so not sure why they'd have a problem with Keychest? I guess one concern I could come up with is that, I suspect Valve is a *lot* more committed to Steam, than Disney might be to Keychest. While Disney themselves is probably at little risk of going out of business any time soon, I wouldn't be overly surprised if Disney tried this, then a year or two later decided to pull the plug and try something else, when the service doesn't instantly make them hundreds of millions of dollars.

Re:So, basically, this is Steam for movies? (3, Insightful)

Dunkz (901542) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827825)

Only when I buy a game on steam I won't want to play it through my home theater, or on my iPhone, or in the car.

Re:So, basically, this is Steam for movies? (1)

mofag (709856) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827833)

That's what I thought too. However, there is one important difference and that is that I trust Valve to not be complete cunts. Yes sometimes they are stupid or unreliable but never evil whereas Disney could be argued to be completely evil in that they are 100% against our interests as consumers and citizens to the extent that they can change international copyright law to suit their own interests and thus deny us content that should by now be in the public domain.

So yes, this system is just like steam for movies but I for one will not be buying in as I don't trust Disney the way I trust Valve.

Nick

Re:So, basically, this is Steam for movies? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29827881)

What happens when Disney decides you aren't complying with its terms, are abusing its service, have posted something nasty on their forums, etc.?

If they lock your keychest account does all your content vanish across all services? Are their forfeiture clauses in the licenses? I only ask because I could see stuff like this happening...

Re:So, basically, this is Steam for movies? (2, Insightful)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827917)

Not quite. Video games come in very few forms, where audio and video come in very many. Steam limits you to the one type of digital output for video games that they use, meaning PC games. I can't however download it in any other format than they provide (not that keychest would be different on that front) - but basically I can't download the ISO image for the CD for the game, nor can I download the 360 version of Half Life 2 from Steam.

What disney seems to be doing is saying:
Hey, You like the Lion King? (I mean I like the lion king) - Go ahead and buy it. You like WMA? Here use our WMA. You like AVI? Have an AVI. New format comes out? Don't worry, when its made available, you'll have access to it.

While similar in theory, Steam does not quite approach what Disney is about to undertake. Keychest will take what Steam does to the next level.

And in my opinion - it will flop horribly. Steam does alright for itself, but when I want to play a game with my friends, they just log into my account- install the game, and we LAN it up. Albeit, perhaps this is a leniency that Steam has agreed not to fix to keep their fans happy - this sort of thing applied to movies will result in a bigger loss. Hey, I bought the Lion King, now so long as I have access, everyone I'm friends with has access. And if I have alot of friends, thats alot of potential customers that won't even consider buying it.

Re:So, basically, this is Steam for movies? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29827923)

More like Cinemanow's Digital Locker [thedigitalmediazone.com] . Disney's offer is a crippled DECE.

Watermark (5, Informative)

iamacat (583406) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827685)

Watermarked content can be played on unlimited number of devices, but can not be posted to thepiratebay. Pirates can attempt conversion, but by the time you are sure you stripped all possible watermarking techniques, the video is so blurry people will buy a legit version anyway. This currently works for Apple/Amazon audio with zero issues. It's too sad that Disney wants both legal and technical special treatment to keep protecting Mickey Mouse.

Re:Watermark (1)

Vahokif (1292866) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827977)

Why can't it be posted to thepiratebay?

Re:Watermark (1)

FooAtWFU (699187) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828045)

Fear of them tracing it back to you, I guess? Though if you set up a throw-away account well enough it wouldn't be as much of an issue. (Pay everything with cash, use a proxy or an Internet cafe or whatever for whatever digital downloads are in question...)

Re:Watermark (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29828167)

Because you'll be found out as a dirty, filthy pirate and your accounts will be closed. You lose access to the cloud backup, and can't buy more media. Also, charges may or may not be filed against you.

Re:Watermark (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29828177)

Why can't it be posted to thepiratebay?

Because the torrent file format doesn't have a place in which to put watermarks. If you add a watermark, it probably doesn't validate as a torrent file and thepiratebay will reject the upload.

watermark on massive consumer sold item ? (3, Insightful)

aepervius (535155) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828047)

Buy 2 or 3 from different retailer under different name and a different CC. Then look at WHERE the difference are. It does not matter if you udnerstand what the data is (encrypted) or not, all you need is to remove or garble it. And they can't have a very big watermark in *All* frame changing msot of the frame, can't they ? For that reason, I doubt watermark can ever work on a digital content which is not DRM protected.

Re:Watermark (2, Insightful)

PayPaI (733999) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828049)

Watermarked content (...) Amazon audio

I'm gonna need some more information here.
According to this: [wired.com]

Since Amazon itself does not apply the watermarks, and labels presumably supply only one MP3 copy of any given song, there’s no way for a label to directly identify and sue an individual if, say, someone were to steal that person’s iPod and share its songs all over the internets

You privy to any more information than that?

Re:Watermark (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29828131)

Watermarking won't help them. A pirate would just buy the product anonymously, with an anonymous credit card ($30 cards available for $35 at walgreens). The pirate would download it over Tor, or if that's too slow, through a botnet, or Internet cafe. Then, when the pirate uploads it to the pirate bay, Disney sees that the watermarked version is registered to the credit card of: John Smith, 12345 Fake Rd, Principality of Sealand.

I think they know this. Their content will have both watermarks and DRM, and it will be an "unlimited number of [approved OS] devices".

Disney is going to be a SSD/harddrive maker? (1)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827713)

If they are competitive, that's welcome news...

wrong again (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29827723)

Shifting media sales from an ownership model to an access model is the major "customer concern" with DRM. All other "customer concerns" are really just derivatives of this one.

Long term (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827733)

Although the idea of getting music, films etc off the net is good in terms of availability (nothing goes out of print/gets `deleted`) etc, there are concerns like the company going bust, or downloaded software being stolen/burnt/failing etc. So whatever solution - permananent, long term solution that is, not `solution` meaning `this weeks stupid idea` - has to allow for the user burning multiple copies onto whatever the current media is (cd/dvd/blu ray/hard disk/tape etc). And I'm just not sure that the big media companies are happy with that idea yet.

IF? (1)

radtea (464814) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827735)

Don't you mean "when"?

Technological, economic and political factors will ensure that the Keychest service will go away. It is a certainty, not a probability.

And users who pay real money for "access" rather than content will get hosed. Again.

Personally, I'm willing to pay for perpetual access so long as I get back a fraction of my money equal to the fraction of "in perpetuity" left when the service goes away.

Roku Copy Here We Come? (1)

IgnacioB (687913) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827753)

Why do I have this feeling that the unit is going to either be a knock-off of Netflix's Roku box and/or one that will download only content from such trusted partners as Viacom, Sony, Paramount, or others from the big media cartel?

if its disney, you know its evil (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827765)

really, is disney ANY kind of friend to the consumer?

what's the deal with this so-called 'vault' of theirs? its artificial market manipulation to create fake 'shortages'.

and the US law that keeps extending copyright is known as the 'mickey mouse law'.

disney dvd's also tend to be CHOCK full of ads, with the 'you MUST watch' flag set.

disney has lost many of us with their shenanigans. I trust MS before I trust disney!

obviously... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29827767)

" However, they do not seem to have addressed the question of what happens to customers' access to purchased content if the Keychest service itself is discontinued.""

Obviously Disney is too big to fail.

DVD Killer eh?? (1)

decipher_saint (72686) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827781)

More direct-to-video "animated" sequels?

Either I own it or I don't. (1)

kheldan (1460303) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827807)

If I can't get a physical copy of something, then I'm not interested. If I don't want a physical copy of something (i.e. something I only want to see once) then I'm perfectly happy to rent it. I don't need or want so-called "solutions" like this, it's just another way to get me to part with my hard-earned money and give me nothing in return. GTFO.

"Redefining ownership as access rights..." (4, Insightful)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827811)

...the Holy Grail of the "content" industry.

Re:"Redefining ownership as access rights..." (1)

value_added (719364) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828123)

Good catch.

William Safire is gone, so I'll offer the guess that the weasel word "access" came into widespread use around the time HMOs were touted as the saviour of America's health care problems back in the 1990s. Hospitals, doctors and nurses, in turn, were renamed using another weasel word, "providers".

If the analogy holds, Disney is now an Entertainment Services Provider, and Keychest is the equivalent of a Entertainment Care insurance policy.

So the way this works is ... (1)

slinches (1540051) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827813)

You purchase a key that allows you access to the same media in different formats from different vendors (if available) and the files need to be downloaded each time you want to play the media on a given device?

How is this better than selling media in a standard format and letting the consumer transcode the file to whatever other formats they choose?

A Task for Sora (1)

PocariSweat1991 (1651929) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827819)

Can a Keyblade be used to crack open this Keychest?

Disney (0, Troll)

Icegryphon (715550) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827849)

and nothing of value was lost.
Really I do not care for the company, their products, and ABC which they own.
This doesn't effect me.

A DVD Killer? (1)

loftwyr (36717) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827867)

Disney is going to start selling a Microwave Oven? Will it be better than my EasyBake?

here are a few reasons why we should (2, Insightful)

nimbius (983462) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827871)

assume this wont work.

1. you were never meant to keep these 'treasured classics' forever like a book. this hurts the business model and prevents releasing such wonderous hits as Cinderella 4.

2. if it isnt open source, it wont be worth a damn. Proprietary encoders and decoders once obsoleted are nearly impossible to reconstruct or reverse-engineer for playback without finding yourself hauled into a Texas courtroom for patent infringement. the 'final solution' they tout will likely involve nothing but closed source players interwoven so closely, you'll forget to question it being a bad idea in light of historical defiance between them.

3. If its a DVD killer, and you own a majority of DVDs, why would you buy it? youve obsoleted the very thing you seek to keep indefinitely?

my theory is there will be a transition. first we had purchasing movies, now we have licensing movies to DVD, and finally we will have with Disneys 'killer' the ability to license limited viewing rights. the content may remain available in a unary format forever, but a recurring cost is introduced and you lose in the end the ability to watch a movie without being monitored for content infringement of "intellectual property" rights. inevitably movies may be retired from the collection, rerendered to lower or higher formats at disneys whim, or require suddenly a new television or provide new advertising content not originally found in the obsolete version you saught to keep. "authoring rights" will be expanded and more buttons on your remote will do less things when you want them to (example: skipping 'dont download a car' scaremercials.)

there is also another possibility entirely: Disney develops this device to lure customers into parting with books and DVD classics, then retires the device in ~8 years to ditch the poor suckers who believed in it as a viable alternative thus driving up sales in existing media for the time as a sort of 'umbrella' in case of stormy economic conditions. user ditches device, goes to walmart, buys latest instalment of Cincerella 5 and another copy of Cinderella 4 because that one is dead now, disney cash registers ring.

Re:here are a few reasons why we should (1)

Aurisor (932566) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828011)

the content may remain available in a unary format forever,

Unary...is that one less than binary?

is this why steve jobs is....... (1)

bootchka (1173217) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827889)

holding out on blu-ray in macs??

Re:is this why steve jobs is....... (1)

bootchka (1173217) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828019)

forget that, stupid thought.

And what happens when the copyright ends? (2, Insightful)

thesupraman (179040) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827895)

You know, that annoying little detail in the copyright law that states once the copyright lapses the content becomes public property?
The price we are supposed to get for our taxes paying for the protection of their rights?

Oh, they didnt think of that? Their intention is for us to never own the content? Hmm.....

Although the DMCA has tried to remove that 'right' already, of course through making it illegal to be able to remove such protection.

Re:And what happens when the copyright ends? (3, Informative)

symbolset (646467) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827983)

They did not think of that because they have no intention of letting any currently held copyright expire, ever. They will just continue to extend the term to "Another 50 years" every 50 years.

Re:And what happens when the copyright ends? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29828053)

You must be new here - the copyright on Disney works will NEVER be allowed to expire. Every time Steamboat Willie almost slips into the public domain, they extend the time limit again. Therefore, Keychest doesn't need to worry about the issue.

Re:And what happens when the copyright ends? (1)

b0bby (201198) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828079)

This is Disney. Their lawyers are the ones responsible for ensuring that nothing after Mickey Mouse was created will ever enter the public domain...

Re:And what happens when the copyright ends? (4, Funny)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828107)

"And what happens when the copyright ends?"

Are you even at all familiar with the Disney company?

Printing Press (4, Interesting)

BlueBoxSW.com (745855) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827897)

It seems to me that media companies see DRM as a printing press on which they can print their own cash.

And seem sore when they find out no one but them seems to value their funny money.

If they really want us to see value in it, they need to back it up with a gold standard... put copies of the movie in some DRM-free format in escrow.

Your technology goes away; we get DRM-free version of the movies we purchased.

Wait... (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827899)

Requiring your DVD player to be connected to the 'net anytime you want to watch a movie... how exactly is that is big win for consumers over what we have now?

Re:Wait... (1)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828089)

It's a very clever tactic used by evil corporations and evil politicians who pay vast sums to infinitely more evil marketing people to come up with these ideas in the first place.

You get everyone worrying and complaining about some doom scenario you predict will happen, then actually bring in something only half as bad... resulting in the mindless majority breathing a huge sigh of relief and accepting it.

Dead DRM remote-authorization services. (5, Informative)

Animats (122034) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827949)

If you bought into any of these, you're a sucker. They don't work any more.

  • Divx (1998-2001). [cnet.com] "Disposable" DVDs tied to a remote authorization system. Promoted by Circuit City and Thompson. Content now unplayable.
  • WalMart Music (2007-2008) [itwire.com] Downloadable music tied to an authorization server. Content now unplayable.
  • PlaysForSure (2004-2008) [wired.com] Microsoft system. Downloadable music tied to an authorization server. Content from AOL MusicNow (closed), Musicmatch Jukebox (closed), Yahoo! Music Unlimited (closed), Spiralfrog (closed), MTV URGE (closed), MSN Music (closed), Musicmatch Jukebox (closed), Ruckus Network (closed) now generally unplayable, although exit strategies exist. Authorization servers were to be shut down August 31, 2008, but were kept up after that date.

Next, Disney.

Despite our retorts, this will succeed (1)

t0qer (230538) | more than 4 years ago | (#29827969)

A few comments ago I talked about an aunt and uncle that worship Disney. [slashdot.org] They are not alone in the Disney cult, the Disney cult has millions of members worldwide. Despite anything we say about "DRM IS BAD KTNX" the Disney cultists will follow their leaders into DRM hell, just to show the world that faith is believing.

All those folks that drive around with Mickey/Minnie vinyls on the back of their windows, all those people that go to Disney 5 times a year, all those people that own every Disney movie ever made will buy into this. They won't care about being locked in, all they're going to care about is that it's Disney.

I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit.

Re:Despite our retorts, this will succeed (1)

cryfreedomlove (929828) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828093)

It will take a lot more than a crazy Aunt and Uncle here an there to make Disney's investment worth it. This has to catch on for millions of average consumers. It will not, because it is too damned confusing for most people to even understand.

Re:Despite our retorts, this will succeed (1)

b0bby (201198) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828105)

I have a Minnie Mouse antenna topper on the minivan, but I won't be buying any DRM from them.

There's a typo... (5, Insightful)

thestudio_bob (894258) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828033)

The system, dubbed Keychest, is being positioned as an answer to consumer concerns about purchasing digital media that are locked to a small number of devices...

The system, dubbed Keychest, is being positioned to lock our customers into a DRM system, so that we can squeeze every penny out of them...

There, fixed that for you Disney.

The DVD killer is already here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29828067)

It's called Hard Disk.

Disney sells fairytale (1, Flamebait)

syousef (465911) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828121)

Extra, extra, read all about it. Disney sells fluffy fairytale DRM that likes to cuddle and sing.

It's not news. It's hype. Disney has always sold fairytales. Disney has always aggressively used DRM. It's the same broken set of ideas that is DRM, packaged yet again for a gullible public. I pay about as much attention to these "announcements" as I do to Nigerian get rich quick spam. No thanks Disney, I don't want to send you my financial details or buy that fairytale bridge that'll make me rich.

For most Americans... (1, Insightful)

rnturn (11092) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828149)

...that aren't yet served by adequate high-bandwidth Internet access this is not going to work. According to the WSJ article:

"when a consumer buys a movie from a participating store, his accounts with other participating services--such as a mobile-phone provider or a video-on-demand cable service--would be updated to show the title as available for viewing. The movies wouldn't be downloaded; rather, they would reside with each particular delivery company, such as the Internet service provider, cable company or phone company."

Then how does one view the movide? If the movie doesn't need to be downloaded, the only way one can view it is to, um, download it. When you want to "access" your movie it's still being transferred from the remote storage to your viewing device. I don't care if you call it downloading or streaming. It still has to move across something with a hell of a lot of bandwidth. (Silly me for thinking that someone from the WSJ would pick up on that.) Sure I wouldn't have to store it on a computer or in/on a phone but -- and maybe it's just me -- I suspect that most people don't save movies on hard disks (other than those they've saved on their DVR's hard disk). When I can get a computer or a phone with a 57" screen, then maybe I'll consider watching movies on something other than my TV.

Want to bet how much your cable and/or phone bill will increase once you start "accessing" that movie you supposedly bought? And those folks who don't even have sufficient bandwidth to stream crappy YouTube videos? Imagine watching an entire feature-length movie in five second chunks. Boy, that's entertainment.

I have to agree with those posters who mentioned that this is a solution in search of a problem. A Rube Goldberg answer from entertainment industry engineers in response to a question posed by the company legal department.

Why do they think I'd want this? (2, Insightful)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828161)

Seriously, this consumer is not interested in buying into a system that relies on the continued external support of the access controls. I'm sure their glib answer is "Disney is huge, and won't go out of business" - but Walmart is even bigger, and they still made the decision to terminate support for their DRMed music store.

what happens to customers' access (3, Funny)

AlgorithMan (937244) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828169)

they do not seem to have addressed the question of what happens to customers' access to purchased content if the Keychest service itself is discontinued

SHUT UP! The user is not supposed to think about that until they launch keychest 2!

Don't diss subscription services (0)

fortapocalypse (1231686) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828179)

What they come up with may or may not last, but it is the way things are going, so get over it. Pandora is awesome (and you should pay for it if you don't). Netflix streaming- also awesome. Disney wants to get on the subscription bandwagon, so be it.

It's Halloween! (1)

Kid Zero (4866) | more than 4 years ago | (#29828181)

So naturally the ghost of Divx rises from the graveyard?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...