Siteseeing: Bits and Pieces

There are a few tech-related stories I’ve been wanting to share but have put on the back-burner lately.

Hulu model in flux

It appears that there is talk of changing Hulu’s current model. Instead of free-for-all streaming of content, they may be moving toward having viewers use their cable subscription credentials for authentication. In other words, Hulu will still be free if you have a cable subscription.

This is an obvious swipe at cord cutters, who immediately reference Hulu and Netflix when discussing how they get occasional television content. The idea is that by withholding Hulu from those who are not paying for cable, it will discourage future cord cutters and possibly persuade previous cord cutters to return to the fold. It’s not a bad plan in the long run. Without Hulu, how else are cord cutters going to watch Community? That’s what NBC Universal, owned by Comcast, is expecting.

Louis CK takes matters into his own hands

What Louis CK knows that most media companies don’t — Tech News and Analysis.

This is the opening salvo for which I’ve been waiting. The war on traditional media distribution has begun, and content creators finally have someone to prop up as an example of success. By the time this post is released, Louis CK has made over $500,000 on his stand up act. It must be noted that he offered it to consumers for $5 in a DRM-free digital format. He has claimed over $200,000 of that for himself. The rest goes to the website, production, etc. The whole venture was a gamble that paid off.

Sony Will Make “Moneyball” Downloadable Before Offering It On Disc

Sony Will Make “Moneyball” Downloadable Before Offering It On Disc – The Consumerist.

I find this practice questionable. Even though it’s sure to be an item streamed from the UltraViolet Digital Locker, it looks like Sony is trying to put itself out of the disc-slinging business just after pushing BluRay to the moon. The question is: If movies are showing up earlier (and probably cheaper) via instantly gratifying download/stream, how will this affect disc sales? Follow-up question: What real benefit is will the average viewing public perceive in a physical copy?

Ultraviolet concerns

UltraViolet was mentioned here well over a year ago before it seemingly became a non-entity. In all honesty, I thought the idea had been dropped due to all sorts of concerns that should have been raised by consumer groups. Color me surprised to find that the service has launched with the releases of The Green Lantern and Horrible Bosses to home media. An additional surprise is that they launched the service with two movies that were generally dismissed by critics and failed to find a strong audience. I’m sure this bodes well for the service.

To clarify, I was being completely sarcastic.

The Public Domain

It is not uncommon these days to be curious about copyright laws and how they became the creature they are today. Not a month goes by without the mention of another lawsuit about someone breaking copyright law, either by copious downloading of material on the internet or by direct reference in something recorded and published. Copyright appears to be this limiting force that somehow costs people thousands of dollars. Honestly, that is all I really knew of copyrights – aside from the obvious “I own the rights to the work, so profits for original sales should go to me.”

Then I discovered James Boyle’s The Public Domain, which he has fittingly offered up for free download. The book is not the complete history of copyright law that I sought. Instead it was an overall easy read about the idea of copyright as well as its evolution to what it is today. It is also a commentary on what it should be.

Is Netflix the future, or will we suffer the wrath of cable companies?

This blog, I assure you, presents absolutely no bias

Netflix has certainly proven itself to be quite the versatile and progressive business in its mere decade of existence. Not only has it all but completely shut down the brick and mortar video rental chains Blockbuster Video and Hollywood Video, but it has firmly entrenched itself among the most popular streaming video content providers online. It seems the company has recently become a threat to cable television and television networks because of its offering easy access to video content.

Ultraviolet Movie Locker doubts

Movie, Tech Powerhouses Team Up for ‘Ultraviolet’ Movie Locker | Epicenter | Wired.com

The story, in short, says that the purchase of a physical or digital copy of an audiovisual media may net the purchaser a token that imbues the right to access or use the media on a future device. It sounds good in theory and helps alleviate reservations about purchasing hardware- or software-specific media, but more information must be shared.

What this all suggests is that all content will be available digitally and therefore all media devices will have to connect to the internet. This works quite well in a world with freely accessible internet access in the home. That is not the world in which I live. Some families will be locked out of this, which is inconvenient. That is a strike against the proposal right there.

I question Sony's involvement based on this alone

There is also concern about the digital form of the media. If I purchase a DVD, will that lock me into 480 resolution? Will future formats offer it upscaled free of charge? Will it be streamed or will it be saved to hardware? These are important questions.

Finally, there is a question about the stored data. How can we be sure that our information will not be exploited? Facebook could not wait to sell user data. What hope is there for a service already supported by Best Buy and Comcast?

Assassin’s DRM

I guess I missed the initial hubbub about Assassin’s Creed 2’s interested take on DRM. Slashdot has fortunately filled me in on what I missed. Just to summarize: The PC version of this single-player game requires a network connection in order to play it, or else it will simply stop. Seems like a pretty effective anti-piracy measure to me.

Except it is pretty stupid. That means that Ubisoft is punishing its players for not always being connected to the internet, as I am sure a few people who actually purchase the game may sneak some plays on their laptops away from home. Not to mention many of the users out there who suffer intermittent connectivity issues. It also means that Ubisoft is wasting money on running servers that essentially just check and re-check for authenticity. Sure they say it will be saving back-ups, but the point is quite clear.

I will avoid making an anti-DRM argument here. Net culture seems to loathe it. I just loathe it when it is poor. This is poor. The best way to encourage people to buy real copies of a game is not to create artificial barriers. Instead companies should be giving the consumers something worthwhile for actually buying the game. Failing to do that, take advantage of the internet – reduce the price of the game and create worthwhile downloadable content that must be purchased. “Worthwhile” is a greatly subjective word, but that is where market research comes in and actually learning who the composition of the audience.

Let me make this easy for the publishers. Step One: Make sure NOT TO PUNISH the consumer for buying your product. You can figure out the rest from there.

re: This is NOT a reason NOT to pirate DVDs

There was an amusing post about DVD content on BSPCN that prompted an informative and also amusing discussion of sorts on The Consumerist today. Basically, consumers spend hard-earned money on DVDs that often force many, many unskippable ads to be viewed before reaching the featured content. At $15+ (or $20+ for blu-ray discs) per unit, some people find this frustrating. They own the content, so they feel they should be allowed to skip right to it.

The Consumerist discussion, as far as was posted at the time of my writing (50 comments), seems to consist mostly of people discussing their illegal workarounds. Yes, there are people proudly promoting bittorrent, and then there are others discussing the benefits of ripping the content to their hard drives sans ads and FBI warnings. And yes, both activities are illegal. A small minority simply say they stream their rentals via Netflix and all is well. This does not really mean anything in a discussion of items to own. It does seem to be the future, however.

I cannot say I care much for the ads, but DVDs with unskippable ads  afford me the time to fix a snack and find a drink before it confronts me with what is usually a gaudy menu screen with confusing items. What is the difference between a bonus and an extra? And, technically speaking, anything that does not alter the feature itself should be considered an extra/bonus, right? Anyway, like the menu is for me, the ads are just a minor inconvenience.

The concern for me is the featured content on each disc. At $15 per disc or a godawful markup for a TV series (which costs roughly the same price to make as a movie DVD), I am finding myself less interested in purchasing DVDs. The accessibility that came from ownership used to be the goal, and bonuses were an amazing perk. I’m finding that those aren’t enough because the DVDs coming out aren’t necessarily items I find myself watching enough to make up for the $15+ that the studios and stores don’t deserve.

Really makes video-on-demand services that much more appealing.