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

The case for physical media ownership

dervis.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 392 posts

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#151

Post by rhinoceraptor »

dijit wrote: post #68
protimewaster wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth, if it was a PS4, they only require internet access the first time a Blu-ray is played. And, I don't mean the first time a specific Blu-ray is played, but the first time any Blu-ray video is played. My guess is that Sony didn't want to pay the licensing fees for every PS4, so, the first time you play a Blu-ray, it connects to Sony to get a license. From then on, you can play them without internet.

Doesn’t feel very reliable, the time I needed it- it didn’t work. What happens when those servers go offline? What happens if I reinstall the PS4? Sony was the principle architect of Blu-Ray, if even they can’t build a system that comes with decryption keys then who can? Blu-Ray players don’t have access to the internet, do they? Also, yeah, my PC not working was part of the issue.

I've never heard of a blu-ray that requires an internet connection. My Sony UHD blu-ray player has an ethernet port but I've never connected it to the internet. A few of my late 2000s era big studio discs advertise online gimmicks like polls, new movie trailers, etc. but I assume all of those servers are now dead.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#152

Post by chrismorgan »

> A 2020 lawsuit raised the same issue, but a California judge dismissed it in 2021 because the plaintiff had never actually lost access to her purchased videos, leaving her without standing.

Seems kinda off. They’re pointing a knife at you menacingly and have promised that in a variety of circumstances they will stab you, but because they haven’t actually stabbed you yet, you’re not allowed to complain. Feels like maybe (maybe; I’m not entirely convinced) that threat should be standing enough, just as conspiracy and attempted murder can be criminal matters, and not just a successful murder.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#153

Post by cassianoleal »

threetonesun wrote: post #15

Physical things take up space and degrade over time. In a world where operating systems and software control licensing owning physical media is barely better than digital except for potentially reselling it. Enjoy something when you enjoy it, however you enjoy it. In the end you can’t keep anything but that.

> Physical things (...) degrade over time

There are many books available older than any of the existing tech companies are likely to exist for. I'd bet those books will remain readable until that time as well, and there's nothing stopping people from making copies of them. Making such copies is in fact also completely legal in a lot of places.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#154

Post by cassianoleal »

geor9e wrote: post #79

As long as we're nitpicking every sense of the word "own", the strongest legal sense means you're the copyright holder, and every sense downstream of that is some lesser license. Buying a disc is a license to view the intellectual property, subject to various restrictions like only showing it within your personal home.

> various restrictions like only showing it within your personal home

Are you implying that lending the disc to a friend so they can watch in their own home is forbidden? Or taking the disc to the friend's place to watch together?

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#155

Post by nik282000 »

Henchman21 wrote: post #90
archerx wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That “Thank you” comes off as a strong “Fuck you”.

As an ex-Sony employee, that is deeply held cultural belief: Sony doesn’t do anything wrong . It is absolutely a fuck you.

It drives me nuts that Sony makes some of the absolute best cameras on the market while being douche canoes in every other aspect. Bambu Labs has definitely taken that lesson to heart in producing great hardware that crushes consumer rights.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#156

Post by rhinoceraptor »

627467 wrote: post #145

If you can't play it you don't own it either. Support of playback of physical media is not guaranteed by the industry. Regardless, I definitely think the all-u-can-eat, 24-7-365, instant, ephemeral media has run its course and has become... tiring?

There definitely seems to be a trend with Gen Z and younger to go back to iPods and physical media. Vinyl record sales are continuing to climb, and CDs seem to be climbing too, now that vinyl records are no longer cheap.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#157

Post by thayne »

> A Blu-ray disc, game cartridge, or printed book generally cannot be removed from a shelf by a remote policy change.

It may not be able to be removed from a shelf, but if it is protected by DRM they can still remotely revoke your ability to consume it, or prevent you from consuming it to begin with (for example geolocking on blu-ray disks). And in some cases a game cartridge, or other medium for software (including games) is either actually just an access key granting access to something on a digital store, or has software that "phones home" and is unusable if it can't contact a server.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#158

Post by wilg »

blfr wrote: post #3

Just pirate it. They can't tell you this but there's a quagmire of rights, licenses, agreements, treaties... and you can untangle this Goridan Knot by just pirating, especially media, for your own use. There are pixel perfect 4k drm-free rips out there made by people who poured thousands of hours into understanding codecs. They will work on any platform, forever, you can stream them or play offline. These rips can be…

Yes, of course it's easier to pirate it. The problem is that its unethical (and illegal). That you find it inconvenient to pay for things you want is not a valid justification.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#159

Post by wilg »

xandrius wrote: post #121
locao wrote: post #113

I'm curious what would take for regular people (i.e. people off HN) to realize what is pointed in the article is a real problem. In my experience, every time I mention this I'm labeled as: nostalgic old guy, Don Quixote wannabe, tinfoil hat supporter, pirate nerd who doesn't understand people just want convenience. I've seen people bit by losing access to purchased content shrug and say "yeah, that's bad isn't it? at…

The battle is alive and well, pirating has never been easier and of this high quality. Support the creators however you want but go foster an environment around your friends and family that there are alternatives to paying evil companies who will remove your access to content willy nilly.

You actually have to support the creators however THEY want if you want access, not however YOU want. I suspect you're not actually supporting all the creators of the things you watch via piracy!

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#160

Post by brookst »

carra wrote: post #70
brookst wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Goods / services. You probably need a relationship to use a warranty. The tension is that digital goods are somewhere between. Especially when the delivery mechanism is streaming, and/or DRM keys that need to be renewed. Sure, many people want a one-time download with no promise or obligation to re-deliver it in the future. Then again, many people don’t want the burden of caring for bytes for the rest of their lives…

> The tension is that digital goods are somewhere between. That's the thing. If they are truly goods, they cannot be in between! Otherwise they are being handled as services and as such they will be terminated at some point. So unless we redefine the word, a true "purchase" can never depend on future actions from the provider (like renewing some DRM).

So no purchasing a warranty or service contract?
Post reply on HN