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!

GOG Introduces DRM-Free Movie Store

Unknown Lamer posted about 2 months ago | from the am-I-dreaming? dept.

Businesses 126

Via Engadget comes news that GOG, the DRM-free game store platform, has launched a DRM-free movie store. The initial set of movies are gamer oriented, and you won't find major studio releases (yet, and not for a lack of trying on the part of GOG). From GOG: Our goal is to offer you cinema classics as well as some all-time favorite TV series with no DRM whatsoever, for you to download and keep on your hard drive or stream online whenever you feel like it. We talked to most of the big players in the movie industry and we often got a similar answer: "We love your ideas, but we do not want to be the first ones. We will gladly follow, but until somebody else does it first, we do not want to take the risk". DRM-Free distribution is not a concept their lawyers would accept without hesitation.

We kind of felt that would be the case and that it's gonna take patience and time to do it, to do it, to do it right. That's quite a journey ahead of us, but every gamer knows very well that great adventures start with one small step. So why not start with something that feels very familiar? We offer you a number of gaming and Internet culture documentaries - all of them DRM-Free, very reasonably priced, and presenting some fascinating insight into topics close to a gamer's heart.
Videos are mostly 1080p (~8GB for a 90 minute film) and can be acquired for about $6. They're using h.264/mp4 and not VP9/Matroska, but you can't have everything ;). If you don't want to download that much data, it looks like all of the videos are also available in 720p and 576p.

cancel ×

126 comments

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

Gaming and internet culture documentaries (2)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 2 months ago | (#47765901)

Gaming and culture documentaries. So, hackers, right?

Off to hack the gibson. BRB.

Re:Gaming and internet culture documentaries (4, Insightful)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 2 months ago | (#47766101)

$6 for a 90-minute YouTube video? Going to have to pass for now.

Re:Gaming and internet culture documentaries (2)

Type44Q (1233630) | about 2 months ago | (#47767561)

$6 for a 90-minute YouTube video?

Cut 'em so slack; $5 of that goes to Verizon. :p

CODEC (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47765931)

They're using h.264/mp4

And I'm glad they do, because that's what people use in the real world.

Re:CODEC (2)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 months ago | (#47767117)

More like, it is what a few players have conspired to force the world to use, by making it a trap.

Re:CODEC (2)

Ksevio (865461) | about 2 months ago | (#47768567)

Here in the real world, when players collaborate on something for everyone to use, we call that a "Standard"

Re:CODEC (1)

FlyHelicopters (1540845) | about 2 months ago | (#47768381)

Yea, this...

The thing is, a few years ago I encoded a bunch of stuff in mkv format, only to discover that everyone and their dog supports mp4.

My new truck will play files directly off a USB drive or a SD card, but only in MP4 format.

I'm now having to reencode everything, grr...

Re:CODEC (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47768465)

MKV is a container format, not a video format. You can easily repackage the contents of an MKV file into whatever you want and vice versa.

Re:CODEC (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 months ago | (#47769895)

Nothing plays VP8 codec in MP4 container either.

Re:CODEC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47768499)

You can't just remux them? IIRC, Handbrake makes it easy (add a few lines of bash and wait).

Size (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47765993)

90 minutes of 1080p @ 8G with h.264? That seems large for streaming/distribution. Even my high-motion archives are 4G with pass-thru audio; the stuff I want to stream gets crunched down to 2G with zero discernible loss of audio/video fidelity.

Re:Size (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 2 months ago | (#47766059)

Ya, I absolutely refuse to download an hour and a half of entertainment at 8 Gigs. Offer it in a range of quality settings, because I can garment you 80% of people cannot afford that much bandwidth and/or do not want to wait 3+ days for that download to finish.

Re:Size (2)

Shinobi (19308) | about 2 months ago | (#47766161)

8 gigs? Eh, it downloads while I go and make a cup of tea and a sandwich

Re:Size (1)

reikae (80981) | about 2 months ago | (#47766595)

Considering that half of the world's population has to live on a mere few dollars per day, you're right most people can't afford the bandwidth.

Re:Size (2)

DickBreath (207180) | about 2 months ago | (#47766681)

You cannot wait patiently for 3 days to download 8 GB?

Then you should not be on Comcast / Time-Warner.

Re:Size (5, Funny)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 2 months ago | (#47767693)

On Comcast it takes 2 hours to download the first half, then 8 days to download the rest after they throttle you. ;-)

Re:Size (1)

MrL0G1C (867445) | about 2 months ago | (#47770023)

They're allowed to throttle customers!!! US is getting really bad

throttling [ientry.com]

Re:Size (1)

CAPSLOCK2000 (27149) | about 2 months ago | (#47768309)

8G in 90 minutes boils 12mbps. If you can afford to pay $6 and have a screen large enough to actually profit from 1080p you should be able to afford an internet connection faster than 12mbit. Where I live you can't get anything below 20 mbit. Of course you might not be able to reach that speed but for most it shouldn't be a problem.

Re:Size (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 2 months ago | (#47768603)

If you live in a major city in that happens to lead the world in internet connectivity, sure. Maybe about 1% of the population of the world has available speeds exceeding 12M. But India (half the world) for example has an average of 5M and that is only counting the ones who can actually get internet at all.

Re:Size (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47769339)

Did you not read the summary? 720p and 576p also offered.

Re:Size (4, Informative)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 2 months ago | (#47766167)

Looking on there site, they appear to have actually released a decent selection of qualities and sizes.

For Example:
TPB AFK: The Pirate Bay Away from Keyboard (1080p) 8.2 GB
TPB AFK: The Pirate Bay Away from Keyboard (720p) 4.1 GB
TPB AFK: The Pirate Bay Away from Keyboard (576p) 781 MB

Re: Size (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766291)

They ought to learn about encoding from YIFY

Re: Size (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766779)

That's funny since YIFY are fucking morons. Quality so bad I swear they are trolling people just to see how dumb the masses really are.

Re: Size (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47768525)

true that, huge pixel count with very low information density, a pure waste of cpu and memory.

Re:Size (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766837)

8gb is pretty respectable for 1080p actually. Good 1080p rips sometimes weigh as much as 15gb depending on running time.

Raw bluray rips are upwards of 40gb so it's funny when people complain about size vs. quality. Like all the idiot YIFY fanboys that seem to like their 1080p rips in bad VHS quality with crushed stereo sound. God I hate them....

Re:Size (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47767295)

Yeah, I get BR ripping 101, thanks. 8G is a very light application of h.264's video compression capabilities, with likely no audio conversion... 15G is hardly worth the trouble unless you're ripping a raw 7.1 audio channel.

I'd challenge you to accurately indicate flaws in audio or video between a 90 minute video ripped at 15G, 8G, and 4G, without the use of equipment designed for such, and I don't mean, "Oh, yeah, I can hear that 160bit jitter!" Yes, compressing 1080p with acceptable video and audio to VCD sizes is completely unreasonable, but so is doubling or tripling your file size to smooth out imperceptible compression artifacts, especially if you plan to move that file across broadband connections of questionable quality.

Re:Size (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47767781)

Clearly you have no experience as you never once mention what an acceptable size for video/audio at 1080p. If you did you would know 8gb is quite good. There is more to it however, as yes it's possible to compress the video further BUT it will require more cpu to decode it. If your playback device is lacking in horsepower this can be a problem. ALL because cheap bastards can't go buy a bigger hdd. An hdd is cheaper than a new system and when it comes to closed system media players, they are all gutless.

And don't even mention streaming, this isn't about that. If you want streaming there are other well known options for that.

Re:Size (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47769873)

flaws from going from 5.1 to stereo are easily spotted :p

indep record store (2)

globaljustin (574257) | about 2 months ago | (#47766043)

my DRM-free movie store is my local indie record store...they have a nice DVD section...

library works too...but not technically a store

indep record store (4, Insightful)

jnik (1733) | about 2 months ago | (#47766123)

Most DVDs aren't DRM-free [wikipedia.org] , either. They may well be restrictions you can live with, but they are encumbered.

Re:indep record store (1)

91degrees (207121) | about 2 months ago | (#47766391)

For practical purposes they are. When the DRM can be cracked in seconds, who really cares? Sure, there are valid socio-political to object in principle, but if you want media that you can copy and format shift, DVD is fine.

Re:indep record store (2)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 months ago | (#47767135)

The DMCA cares. it stifles massive amounts of speech on this subject.

indep record store (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47767541)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWi5jdgTUJs

head of 'DVD john'? (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about 2 months ago | (#47768151)

hey, jnik, judging by your UID# & the text of your comment you've been away from the internet since about 1996...

there are many free/shareware DVD rippers that circumvent that DRM

...to do it, to do it, to do it right. (2)

Matheus (586080) | about 2 months ago | (#47766063)

"it's gonna take patience and time to do it, to do it, to do it right." That's kind of catchy... pretty sure I'll write a song with that as the chorus :-)

Re:...to do it, to do it, to do it right. (2)

_anomaly_ (127254) | about 2 months ago | (#47766555)

But it's gonna take money, a whole lotta spendin' money...

...to do it, to do it, to do it right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766715)

Too Bad you weren't fast enough, ya slug.

Why not MP4? (3, Insightful)

Pope (17780) | about 2 months ago | (#47766065)

Why wouldn't they choose h.264/mp4? It's playable just about anywhere these days.

Re: Why not MP4? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766105)

Patents

Re:Why not MP4? (4, Insightful)

mrchaotica (681592) | about 2 months ago | (#47766157)

Because there's a good chance that anyone who cares about it being DRM-free also cares about it being patent-free. I certainly do, although this is still "a good start."

Re:Why not MP4? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766393)

Because there's a good chance that anyone who cares about it being DRM-free also cares about it being patent-free.

And such people can go fuck themselves. I prefer quality. VP9 is NOT quality, despite the claims to the contrary.

Re:Why not MP4? (5, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 2 months ago | (#47766651)

Perhaps not so good a chance as it seems.

Sure, most of us Slashdotters are in the middle of that particular Venn diagram, but my wife, for example, lies far off to the "hatred of DRM only" side. She doesn't care about patent licensing, but just wants to watch a movie easily. For us, that means no physical media occupying our limited shelving space.

It should be easy. Many movies are now offered with a digital copy, available on various services. Last time she wanted to watch a movie right now, we tried that, buying Frozen from iTunes. Unfortunately, iTunes apparently won't play such things to a VGA-connected device, because it can't verify the device supports HDCP. Naturally, there's no warning about this until you actually try to do it. I think the next thing we tried was Plex, streaming to our Roku device. That didn't work, either.

We ended up getting a refund from Apple, and bought a physical copy from Amazon. Once the physical disk arrived, it included a code to get a digital copy. We had to choose carefully how to use the code, judging by current compatibility charts what devices would be able to play the copy. Still hoping for convenience, we tried Amazon's streaming service, but that wouldn't play at all on our TV-connected laptop, and the Roku didn't feel like connecting to Amazon to even attempt playback. We finally just gave up and played the physical copy, several days after the initial attempt.

My wife is fine with respecting copyright and paying for entertainment. She just expects that entertainment should not be the reward for solving a puzzle of compatibility.

I've praised GOG before, and I'll do it again. Their primary concern seems to be that entertainment should be easy, and I'll support that, even if it means throwing a bit of support behind patents.

Roku (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47769241)

You should send your Roku in to be repaired, seriously. I've used two different generations of Roku with my Amazon account and never had a single problem watching video from it or Netflix or anything else.

Or, of course, triple check that you are making the connection properly.

Re:Why not MP4? (1)

grep -v '.*' * (780312) | about 2 months ago | (#47769763)

She doesn't care about patent licensing, but just wants to watch a movie easily. ... My wife is fine with respecting copyright and paying for entertainment. She just expects that entertainment should not be the reward for solving a puzzle of compatibility.

OK, so seriously: since you ordered it from Amazon (but it wasn't in your physical possession yet), why not download it and watch from TPB in the meantime?

Or if that offends your sensibilities (since you didn't actually have the physical media and thus you haven't yet legally executed any shrink-wrap agreements), then put that copy up on the shelf and let someone else rip and encode it for you. THEY might not have a license to use or distribute, but YOU have a license to watch -- literally. Your wife wants convenience? That pirate copy will play on your Roku, Plex, HDMI, VGA, or even CGA [techcrunch.com] . (You reallly want to look at that last link, it's funny.)

Going out on a limb here, you do need to purchase the show before watching it (which you've done.) But the actual device you watch the show on is immaterial, rather it be a 3" smart watch, a 11" tablet, or your brand new 19,720" TV [lsionline.co.uk]

And if you feel you must watch your exact particular copy of bits, then visit: SlySoft [slysoft.com] which can generate a file that will (once again) play thru anything you have. Burning a new unprotected physical DVD and leaving the original untouched is what it's designed for, but I think more people (I know that *I* do) rip their copies and use the computer as a giant movie jukebox instead. The original DVDs stay in a box in the basement while the bits I actually use are getting dizzy spinning around on disks.

(And we won't even mention the evilness of this [popcorntime.io] . It's a free NetFlix-like "publicly provided" movie source where the only thing missing (I think) is the legal license to distribute the source material to start with.)

I read the title as... (5, Funny)

creimer (824291) | about 2 months ago | (#47766095)

GCC Introduces DRM-Free Movie Store

Something else for Linus Torvalds to complain about after GCC 4.9.0 [slashdot.org] . :/

Re:I read the title as... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47767163)

I read your comment as a cry for attention

Slashdotted (2)

CAPSLOCK2000 (27149) | about 2 months ago | (#47766141)

It's been a while since we had a proper Slashdotting, especially of a professionally run website, but right now GOG is down, overwhelmed by the attention. They deserve the attention. Let's hope they sell a lot and get the message across to the movie industry.

Re:Slashdotted (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766191)

It's probably overwhelmed by everyone rushing in to pay $6 for an 8GB download of "Indie Game: The Movie."

Price point is way too high (1)

Idimmu Xul (204345) | about 2 months ago | (#47766151)

99 cents might sway me, but as it is none of these are worth the price

Re:Price point is way too high (2)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 2 months ago | (#47766179)

This. Unfortunately GOG does not have nearly enough industry sway to make them take reasonable prices for their product.

Re:Price point is way too high (1)

Qzukk (229616) | about 2 months ago | (#47766309)

Eh, $6 is cheaper than most movie tickets and non-bargain blurays these days and I can watch the movie whenever, however, and wherever I want so it's more than a rental. The selection is underwhelming but if they ever get something I wanted to see in HD I'd probably do it.

Re:Price point is way too high (1)

c0d3g33k (102699) | about 2 months ago | (#47768361)

GOG runs weekly sales on their games, and seasonal mega-sales against a large portion of their catalog. I don't see why this wouldn't be the case for video, so just wait and you'll likely see something you want for a price you're willing to pay. Ah, the joys of a free and open market ...

Where is ... (1, Interesting)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 2 months ago | (#47766153)

Where is GET LAMP (2010), where is Going Cardboard (2012), where is BBS: The Documentary (2005), where is The King of Kong (2007)?

Re:Where is ... (5, Informative)

jones_supa (887896) | about 2 months ago | (#47766335)

You can request them in GOG's wishlist for movies [gog.com] . :)

Why not some really old movies (1)

Bob the Super Hamste (1152367) | about 2 months ago | (#47766195)

Why don't they see about getting some really old movies that have passed into the public domain and cleaning them up. The first one that comes to mind is Nosferatu [wikipedia.org] but there are a number of other old films that would qualify as well.

Re:Why not some really old movies (1)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 2 months ago | (#47766241)

Because there just aren't that many movies made before 1923 with extant prints?

Re:Why not some really old movies (4, Insightful)

Kiwikwi (2734467) | about 2 months ago | (#47767501)

There are more recent films that also lapsed into the public domain, due to a failure to register the copyright, "Night of the Living Dead" being perhaps the most well-known example.

The real reason why GOG doesn't include these films is three-fold:

1) There are already sites doing this (for free), e.g. the Internet Archive [archive.org] .

2) The quality of the original prints is often poor, restoring old movies requires great skill and is very expensive, and existing restorations are not public domain.

3) Most importantly, it's besides the point. GOG is trying to get the film industry to recognize the value of selling DRM-free movies, like the music industry did before them. Selling public domain movies would be plain counter-productive.

Here's hoping they'll succeed where others have failed before them.

Re:Why not some really old movies (1)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about 2 months ago | (#47766821)

Why don't they see about getting some really old movies that have passed into the public domain and cleaning them up. The first one that comes to mind is Nosferatu [wikipedia.org] but there are a number of other old films that would qualify as well.

Because some might already be available, on YouTube?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

Re:Why not some really old movies (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 2 months ago | (#47769617)

Blah!

Re:Why not some really old movies (1)

decipher_saint (72686) | about 2 months ago | (#47767767)

Archive.org is your friend

Beyond movies, you can also find old TV shows and music that are no longer under copyright

Re:Why not some really old movies (1)

tepples (727027) | about 2 months ago | (#47769971)

you can also find old TV shows and music that are no longer under copyright

How is that possible? Practical TV broadcasts didn't begin until years after the January 1, 1923, cutoff for the Copyright Term Extension Act. And U.S. copyright law allows state copyright in sound recordings to continue until 2067.

Why not free? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766199)

I prefer dollar free than DRM-free because DRM can be circumvented.

Well, I guess this changes nothing except more stuff on BitTorrent..

The moment of truth (4, Insightful)

jones_supa (887896) | about 2 months ago | (#47766215)

Well, boys and girls, doesn't this finally solve all your complaints regarding movies being peppered with DRM by the request of MAFIAA? ;)

As GOG's collection grows, and if you find content that you actually are interested in, would you prefer this movie service over pirating?

Re:The moment of truth (4, Insightful)

Piata (927858) | about 2 months ago | (#47766375)

Yes, I definitely would.

I use Steam, Humble Bundle and GOG for games.

I use http://bandcamp.com/ [bandcamp.com] for music

If I can find a DRM free source for Movies and Television, I'd never need to "acquire" anything again. GOG's prices are a little high ($6 would be the most I'd pay for most movies) but provided they do sales where they slash prices 50% or more, I'd buy movies through them.

Re:The moment of truth (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766655)

I buy DRM-free movie bundles via Humble Bundle, Vo.Do and many Kickstarter projects I support give me DRM-free movie or episode downloads (just doublecheck they'll do this before backing); VHX is the "Bandcamp" for movies but unfortunately you need to know the individualized web-page for each movie (or stand-up routine) etc. that gets sold through their platform since they don't offer any convenient browsing / searching options (i.e. to buy an Anziz Ansari stand-up go to https://azizansari.vhx.tv/buy/... [azizansari.vhx.tv] or to buy JourneyQuest Seasons1 or 2 http://www.journeyquestmovie.c... [journeyquestmovie.com] ).

Re:The moment of truth (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766673)

FYI, music sold through the major retailers (iTunes, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, etc.) has not had DRM for years.

Re:The moment of truth (1)

Ravaldy (2621787) | about 2 months ago | (#47766841)

But currently renting a movie on Vu is $6.00. Would $6.00 be very reasonable for owning unless I'm miss understanding the DRM Free concept.

Re:The moment of truth (2)

q4Fry (1322209) | about 2 months ago | (#47766419)

I was somewhat sympathetic to the "We pirate because there's no legal way to get it online" until I read an article yesterday that highlighted NetFlix piracy.

If NetFlix doesn't serve your country, fine. I am not talking to you. If, however, you're getting House of Cards on isohunt or whatever the kids do these days, you can't claim it as "no legal way" anymore. Admit that you just don't want to pay $8 a month to be entertained.

Re:The moment of truth (1)

geminidomino (614729) | about 2 months ago | (#47766475)

That's also assuming that they're using one of the Netflix "Blessed" OSes and/or devices.

Re:The moment of truth (2)

Unknown Lamer (78415) | about 2 months ago | (#47766477)

Netflix imposes onerous DRM and just doesn't work on GNU/Linux. The way they backdoored DRM into HTML5 is pretty disguisting too.

Re:The moment of truth (1)

swv3752 (187722) | about 2 months ago | (#47767579)

http://www.webupd8.org/2013/08... [webupd8.org] It should read use Netflix in your Linux browser, because who uses Silverlight for anything but Netflix?
It works. It just doesn't work officially.

Re:The moment of truth (1)

hypergreatthing (254983) | about 2 months ago | (#47766573)

what if i subscribe to netflix and download?

Re:The moment of truth (1)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 2 months ago | (#47767821)

You're not supposed to download from Netflix, you're supposed to STREAM. Big difference. If Netflix were a movie PURCHASING service, yeah, I could see you're point. If it were all-you-can-download, it would cost a shitload lot more than $8/month.

Re:The moment of truth (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47768279)

Personally, I primarily have time to watch TV series when I'm on an airplane. Which makes legal services not very useful.

Re:The moment of truth (1)

Mantrid42 (972953) | about 2 months ago | (#47766575)

Unless you have a crappy connection that makes streaming all but impossible.

Re:The moment of truth (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766693)

I don't pirate.

But I refuse to pay money to Netflix until they stop using pop-under ads and apologize for the ones they have used (and preferably apologize in a really concrete and measurable and expensive way.)

They also don't have most of the shows I actually watch.

Re: The moment of truth (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47767497)

Netflix does not have pop under ads. I don't recall them ever having had them either, perhaps years ago they did and my memory is flawed.

Re:The moment of truth (1)

Junta (36770) | about 2 months ago | (#47767153)

I don't download that stuff, but as a netflix user who also has DVD rips and DVR recordings that I manage under XBMC, I can easily understand the appeal of having the content locally and in a form that can be integrated with media from other sources.

Netflix outages are frustrating. When it is up, sometimes I can't stream the best quality in real time. Sometimes the client has to be kicked in the head for no apparent reason to make it stream at all or stream the best reasonable quality. Any seeking takes a relatively long time, and won't seek with the same precision as xbmc will. It does an admirable job of a UI, but it's not my favorite. I wish the streaming service could be mated with third party applications better to allow more than just netflix's concepts of show organization and playback control to work with their content, as well as the ability to prebuffer the highest quality regardless of my current conditions. I also find it excessively wasteful if I feel like rewatching something and knowing it redownloads it every time, which is where I would like to jump to 'just buy the damn thing' were there a convenient legal option without DRM.

That all said, they still have a great deal better software experience than amazon prime...

Re:The moment of truth (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766739)

As GOG's collection grows, and if you find content that you actually are interested in, would you prefer this movie service over pirating?

Yep. Been a GOG customer from the very start. Bought lots of games at what I consider a very reasonable price. I'm looking forward to the same for the films, since I don't pirate, really, though I suppose time shifting borrowed DVDs counts. If GOG gets some good, timeless, classic stuff, I will build up a collection, for sure.

It's probably a moot point really, but since the copyright maximalist fervor seems to be escalating, I've always hoped that GOG would offer something like cryptographically signed receipts (eg. signed with my public GPG key) to prove that I have indeed purchased a particular work and have the right to carry it around with me on one of my devices. Thinking long term, being able to prove I purchased a particular work in digital format might be useful as services come and go. Being able to get a discount to those works on a future platform would be nice, as well as passing on the rights to my heirs (as in the recent Delaware law - http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/legal-and-management/6221970/delaware-enacts-wide-ranging-law-to-transfer-digital)

I'll be eying it eagerly... (1)

Junta (36770) | about 2 months ago | (#47767099)

I had pretty much given up all hopes of DRM-free video via legitimate channels, even as music is pretty much DRM-free exclusively.

I'm not getting my hopes too much, but like DRM-free music before it, I'll be very eager to give them my money instead of buying DVDs with it.

I'm however fully expecting like eBooks, the DRM-free selection will remain sad and pathetic.

Re:The moment of truth (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 months ago | (#47767169)

Not in the slightest. Until there is a DCMA exception for fair use, the MAFIAA is still well on the hook. Fair use should not be allowed to be bound by encryption.

mod 0p (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766537)

w9hole has lost [goat.cx]

Watermarks? (2)

Somebody Is Using My (985418) | about 2 months ago | (#47766581)

While they have been true to their word about no DRM, I've always wondered if GOG games (and now movies) have some sort of digital watermark embedded in them so they can track any piracy of their sales back to the source. While this wouldn't be a foolproof method, it probably would catch the more common sort of file-sharing. It doesn't really seem to have any drawbacks for the customer either. If such a watermark does exist, it might make the major studios more willing to consider GOG as a distribution partner.

Re:Watermarks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766709)

I'd think that having an unique watermark for video-on-demand movies is pretty impractical. Having a general watermark would give them valuable statistical information, though.

Re:Watermarks? (0)

91degrees (207121) | about 2 months ago | (#47766943)

Some metadata perhaps. It's easy to remove if you know where it is but a lot of people really don't have a clue.

I think expectation of piracy is built into GOG's business model, but, there's no reason not to have some ability to track leaked files if only for analysis purposes.

Re:Watermarks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47767217)

there's no reason not to have some ability to track leaked files if only for analysis purposes.

Sure there is. The (possible) legal expectation that GoG would be forced to act on said metadata.

Its the same reason why ISPs try/tried not to track the download activities of their users/customers. There was always the possibility/threat that the **AA's would claim that ISPs knowingly identified IP thieves but failed/refused to act on said information.

Re:Watermarks? (2)

Kardos (1348077) | about 2 months ago | (#47766767)

I can think of a $12 experiment that would answer that question

Re:Watermarks? (1)

dkman (863999) | about 2 months ago | (#47768225)

+1 Insightful. True. True enough.
I always have mod points the day before I want to use them.

Re:Watermarks? (1)

khellendros1984 (792761) | about 2 months ago | (#47766883)

That should be easy to test; sha1sum a bunch of the installers, and compare the results to someone else's list. I've got some DOS games, both on the original CD and via GOG; the game files themselves weren't modified in those cases, so any watermark would have to be contained elsewhere, in the GOG-provided files (which aren't strictly necessary to run the games, if you provide your own DosBox and configuration).

Re:Watermarks? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47766895)

There's no need for a watermark, the game torrents are helpfully labeled as gamename_gog on the pirate bay...

Re:Watermarks? (1)

Mr D from 63 (3395377) | about 2 months ago | (#47766971)

Licensee specific watermarks always seemed to me to be a logical path to take, even with other DRM in place, just to help track and find sources of distribution.

You called? (1)

watermark (913726) | about 2 months ago | (#47767173)

I'm everywhere

Re:Watermarks? (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 months ago | (#47767203)

Watermarks are pointless in this context. Watermarks are used to annoy pirates and nail leaky insiders, thats about it. Its an extremely limited tactic.

Re:Watermarks? (1)

Kiwikwi (2734467) | about 2 months ago | (#47767675)

Watermarks are pointless in this context. Watermarks are used to annoy pirates and nail leaky insiders, thats about it. Its an extremely limited tactic.

Exactly. Watermarks are useless against general piracy, since the burden of proof is simply too high to take the case against John Q. Public.

For instance, most people don't know that when you buy music on iTunes, Apple puts your e-mail-address in a metadata comment field in the file. But now that you do know, feel free to take a look at The Pirate Bay and start collecting e-mail addresses from AAC files.

Note that it's not a watermark - it's not in the audio data, it's plainly visible in the file and it's trivially removed. Yet the pirates don't even do that. And why should they? I've never heard of a person being even threatened with legal action over this.

Re:Watermarks? (1)

Ardyvee (2447206) | about 2 months ago | (#47768995)

Isn't that a kind of DRM, though?

No DRM on Steam's movies either (1)

Wootery (1087023) | about 2 months ago | (#47767005)

To Steam's credit, they too provide Indie Game: The Movie without DRM. You can just pull out the file after it's downloaded.

That will go nicely with the new 8TB drive (1)

BLToday (1777712) | about 2 months ago | (#47767831)

I was planning on filling that 8TB drive with documentaries on the female body but I guess DRM-free 1080p will work too.

GOG meet Netflix (1)

camazotz (1242344) | about 2 months ago | (#47769085)

GOG is not competing with video retailers, they're competing with streaming services like Netflix. GOG, meet Netflix. They get my $8.55 a month and will continue to do so for as long as I can stream videos from them without a price restriction. When you can do this count me in.

Wish Lists (1)

Rinikusu (28164) | about 2 months ago | (#47769119)

I'd love to see if they can acquire a ton of the 60s/70s Italian Cinema (eurocrime, spaghetti westerns, horror).

Re:Wish Lists (1)

Rinikusu (28164) | about 2 months ago | (#47769123)

Oh, and Kung Fu movies. Nothing like reliving my youthful saturday afternoons.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?