Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zediva Streams Movies From Physical DVD Players, Argues It’s Legal

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 51 posts

Re: Zediva Streams Movies From Physical DVD Players, Argues It’s Legal

#41

Post by DisposaBoy »

hugh3 wrote: post #22
TeHCrAzY wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also more difficult, and drastically more expensive than BitTorrent.

Yes yes, and paying for your groceries is more expensive than shoplifting too, can we please not have the discussion where people pretend that stealing stuff is just as good as buying it? Most people are law-abiding citizens.

Last year? I downloaded a pirated copy of the movie Ink. I wasn't ever going to go to the cinema nor was(and won't) I going to buy it on DVD. I did however buy 2 copies totally about $30 IIRC from the creator directly. This is just one case from one person. Many people who pirate movies also buy the ones they think are worth their money. The think most people like you don't realise is that most of the people who don't pay for any of it in any form wasn't going to do so even if it wasn't available for free. And I too can just blanket everything under a misguided and biased argument; No it's actually more expensive to shoplift because if you were walked out with enough you'd very very likely get caught and you're likely to face some legall challenges not to metion the fact that many people won't hire you unless they have to. That doesn't even take into account the other point you so conveniently misse: it's harder. That point is actually more important than the cost as shown in my case of buying Ink for $30 which is at least 3 times more than it would have cost me to go to the cinema.

Re: Zediva Streams Movies From Physical DVD Players, Argues It’s Legal

#42

Post by cma »

omh wrote: post #19
Figs wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why even bother having someone to switch DVDs if you can get the players so cheaply? Just assign a disk to a player and treat it as a unit, and don't touch it unless it breaks. You could even wire up the unit to be controlled by software and powered off when no one wants to watch that movie. I suppose it would increase space usage, but it would greatly simplify operations if you don't have to depend on a person to lo…

I imagine that the AV cabling and switches could get pretty expensive with that many players.

Would it be more expensive than what netflix has to do with physical rentals? No.

Re: Zediva Streams Movies From Physical DVD Players, Argues It’s Legal

#43

Post by prodigal_erik »

tomjen3 wrote: post #39
throw_away wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

honest question: do you think identity theft should likewise be renamed?

Since identity theft means that the person looses stuff (privacy, high credit score, etc) it seems like it was perfectly named.

"Identity theft" is merely a type of fraud. The victims are the creditors, and what you "lose" (the opinion they have of you) never belonged to you.

Re: Zediva Streams Movies From Physical DVD Players, Argues It’s Legal

#44

Post by axod »

hugh3 wrote: post #38
gregschlom wrote: post #7

I'm curious to see wich kind of legal weapon the movie companies are going to use to fight this one. I expect something like forbid playing rental dvds on players more than 10 feet away from the TV... This is going to be sick.

I think one could make a not-entirely-unreasonable argument that by streaming the DVD you're making an unauthorized copy of the data on it. What are they doing, after all? They read bits off the DVD, make another set of bits which contains essentially the same information compressed, and transmit it to a remote location. Sounds like making a copy to me.

Scenario 1: Your DVD player is connected to your TV with a cable.

Scenario 2: A DVD player is connected to your TV via several cables (The internet).

I don't see a great difference there, other than the length of the cable.

Re: Zediva Streams Movies From Physical DVD Players, Argues It’s Legal

#45

Post by oiujhygtyhuji »

hugh3 wrote: post #21
Jabbles wrote: post #3

And just like that, the technological world takes a step backwards. It's akin to when Concorde was decommissioned; the standard way to sell streamed movies may become to have a physical copy, with all the limitations that causes. This time it's due to legal restrictions. Whilst this change will hopefully benefit customers and help lower prices, anyone can see that this is not the optimal solution.

Actually I think it might work the other way. At the moment Netflix can't get licenses to stream the vast majority of movies. But if this business model works and is legal then Netflix can say "Hey look, your fancy new movie is going to get streamed over the internet anyway, you might as well license it to us". I imagine the studios make more money on average getting fifteen cents per watch from Netflix than selling…

Or they just charge $1000/copy for 'rental' DVDs with a license saying that the retail DVDs can't be rented.

That's what used to happen in VHS days - the rental copy to blockbuster was $100, then 6 months later the retail copy came out for $10.

Re: Zediva Streams Movies From Physical DVD Players, Argues It’s Legal

#46

Post by hugh3 »

cma wrote: post #40
hugh3 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think one could make a not-entirely-unreasonable argument that by streaming the DVD you're making an unauthorized copy of the data on it. What are they doing, after all? They read bits off the DVD, make another set of bits which contains essentially the same information compressed, and transmit it to a remote location. Sounds like making a copy to me.

How do you play a DVD on a modern TV? HDMI. Same exact type of "copy". If you "rent" the player from them as well as the movie, then it is the same fair use that allows you to play a DVD on your tv. HDMI, or whatever--even via analog makes up to 5+ copies just to get out of a modern TV (D->A from your player, A->D to your TV, several copies and augmented copies into a buffer handling picture processing, scaling, and…

The difference being that those copies are authorized by the copyright holder and this one is not.

You're right in that that's an obvious counterargument. I don't know how it would play out in court. I don't wish to argue that my "this is a copy" argument is undefeatable, but I think it's sufficiently plausible that this is what the copyright holders will argue when it comes to trial.

Re: Zediva Streams Movies From Physical DVD Players, Argues It’s Legal

#47

Post by hugh3 »

axod wrote: post #44
hugh3 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think one could make a not-entirely-unreasonable argument that by streaming the DVD you're making an unauthorized copy of the data on it. What are they doing, after all? They read bits off the DVD, make another set of bits which contains essentially the same information compressed, and transmit it to a remote location. Sounds like making a copy to me.

Scenario 1: Your DVD player is connected to your TV with a cable. Scenario 2: A DVD player is connected to your TV via several cables (The internet). I don't see a great difference there, other than the length of the cable.

And this is why geeks make bad lawyers. "Surely," they say, "if A is allowed, and if by a set of trivial extensions we can turn A into B, then B must also be allowed". But the law looks at A and B and sees two very different things, draws a hard boundary which might not make any particular sense, and doesn't care about careful analytic arguments.

Here's another copyright problem. If I have a party and screen a DVD to ten people, that's fine. If I have a party and screen a DVD to twenty people, that's fine. But if I have a party and screen a DVD to five hundred people, I'm holding a public screening and it's not allowed under the terms of my DVD license. How can this be? It just is.

Re: Zediva Streams Movies From Physical DVD Players, Argues It’s Legal

#48

Post by axod »

hugh3 wrote: post #47
axod wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scenario 1: Your DVD player is connected to your TV with a cable. Scenario 2: A DVD player is connected to your TV via several cables (The internet). I don't see a great difference there, other than the length of the cable.

And this is why geeks make bad lawyers. "Surely," they say, "if A is allowed, and if by a set of trivial extensions we can turn A into B , then B must also be allowed". But the law looks at A and B and sees two very different things, draws a hard boundary which might not make any particular sense, and doesn't care about careful analytic arguments. Here's another copyright problem. If I have a party and screen a DVD t…

That's a separate issue though. Screening a single physical DVD to a party of people simultaneously is illegal.

But me connecting a really long cable to a DVD player and connecting it to my TV. There's no way that can be illegal. There is no A and B in your argument. There is 'A'. Connecting a DVD player to a TV using a cable.

Re: Zediva Streams Movies From Physical DVD Players, Argues It’s Legal

#49

Post by chesser »

prodigal_erik wrote: post #43
tomjen3 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since identity theft means that the person looses stuff (privacy, high credit score, etc) it seems like it was perfectly named.

"Identity theft" is merely a type of fraud. The victims are the creditors, and what you "lose" (the opinion they have of you) never belonged to you.

Identity theft is a much broader issue than just credit reports.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_theft

Essentially it's a way to accrue benefits while pushing any negative consequences on someone else. Those negative consequences can be material and not merely opinion. (E.g., your actual bank account can be drained and your checks can bounce.)

Further, opinion does translate into material consequences. Your options largely depend on the opinion that other people have of you.

Even narrowly construed, a mere credit score is a source of opinion that can affect everything from housing (buying OR renting) to employment, to getting a cell phone or any other type of service. Straightening out your credit can be very difficult, and even if you are successful, the fraud was a denial of service attack against your time. Credit bureaus rarely if ever face penalties for maintaining inaccurate information, so the onus is on the person whose identity was stolen.

If you don't think the individual is victimized, I invite you to post all your credentials and see where the experiment leads.

Re: Zediva Streams Movies From Physical DVD Players, Argues It’s Legal

#50

Post by theoneill »

throw_away wrote: post #35
IgorPartola wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop using the S word! Seriously. When you steal something, the rightful owner no longer has the item. You cannot by definition steal digital content. You can merely copy it. Does that result in damages to the original owner? Maybe. Is it stealing? No.

honest question: do you think identity theft should likewise be renamed?

That's a metaphor.
Post reply on HN