Sony Patents Anti-Rental Tech

[Glenn Gipson]

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6283697.html

[Shawn Redford]

Wow - you couldn't even lend this to a family member. I hope this fails.

[Daniel Runyon]

There's no way that's gonna fly. Nobody's buying a movie they can only watch in one room of their home. Nobody's buying a bunch of games that will not play on their new system after their old one gets a drink spilled on it. No way. The more they tighten their grip, the more systems will slip through their fingas.

[Adam Keen]

Sony - Be selfish, don't share!

Didn't that limited time use DVD flop?

Aren't they aware that there products do break and need to be replaced?

[Steve McDonald]

The money-grubbers never learn, do they? Ever since home video was introduced in the 1970s, content producers have let their greed and desire to control everything, turn them into their own worst enemies. These schemes of usage limitation always backfire and they lose money and market potential. If they hadn't lost the BetaMax Supreme Court cases, they wouldn't have been able to make their billions in the video sales and rental business. If they are not prevented from shooting themselves in the foot again on the latest version of this issue, everyone on both sides will lose. They are delaying and restricting blue laser systems and all the while so many potential customers are chomping at the bit for it. By stingily saving pennies by trying to prevent media sharing, they are losing big dollars and thwarting what could be a huge cash cow, if they'd just let it run. The customers they regard as being common thieves, are in fact, the biggest promotional allies they could have, in expanding this new technology. The oldest maxim of successful business is to give the customers what they want.
The new formula seems to be to give them only what the business wants them to have. One company in particular, seems intent on trashing the brand-loyalty that has been their top marketing tool.

Steve McDonald

[Steve House]

The phrase "Stepping over a dollar to pick up a dime" keeps jumping into my head.

[Joe Carney]

It's called boycott. The most powerful and legal weapon in the world.
Don't steal, just don't buy.
Just say 'NO F'N WAY'.

[Glenn Gipson]

I know Chris doesn't allow brand bashing, but this 'greed' issue reminds me of Sony's refusal to put true 24p into its prosumer cameras.

[Sean McHenry]

For a long time I wondered why Producers and Directors don't write into their contracts that they will not allow their work to be shown unless it is in it's entirety. That is to say, allowing for commercial breaks is fine but the cutting of material for time is patently WRONG.

Why do they not stand up for their credits either? The abominable practice of "squeezing back" the credits so that AMC or Stars can cover up their paid for musical score and title effects to fit in a cheap shot for their next butchered feature is deplorable. I refuse to watch or pay for Stars and now AMC. They do a genuine dis service to the people making these films by running the credits at 3x normal speed and covering up the music that someone paid to have written. Titles aren't free either you know and when they squash them into a tiny keystone box on the right 1/3rd of my screen, that just makes me mad.

Why don't the people that make this art form stand up and protect their works from such practices? Surely there has to be a way for folks like Ron Howard and Rob Reiner to keep their films whole or at least not run over at the end.

They should also stand up to practices like this. Musical artists should also take a stand against Sony for their "root kit" issue with DRM music. We the viewers can do this if we band together but it's going to take a whoile bunch of us not buying CDs and DVDs to get them to even notice. I think it would hurt more if the producers, directors, writers and musicians said they weren't going to produce under these situations.

Sean McHenry

[Patrick Jenkins]

The only people who really like watching credits are the people who are in them or related/affliated with or obsessive-compulsive types.

Step out of your professional video guy shoes for a moment to consider the broader (audience - because ultimately that's your intended goal) point of view:

Would you as Joe Schmoe want to sit through 3-6 minutes (assuming feature here) of names of people you either 1) already know because you recognize them for their talent or their face, 2) will never ever have the chance of meeting in real life, or 3) just plain don't care what went into making it?

I bet the only reason you see ANY credits whatsoever is probably because of contracts forcing them to be displayed.

[Mike Teutsch]

Originally Posted by Sean McHenry

For a long time I wondered why Producers and Directors don't write into their contracts that they will not allow their work to be shown unless it is in it's entirety. That is to say, allowing for commercial breaks is fine but the cutting of material for time is patently WRONG.

Why do they not stand up for their credits either? The abominable practice of "squeezing back" the credits so that AMC or Stars can cover up their paid for musical score and title effects to fit in a cheap shot for their next butchered feature is deplorable. I refuse to watch or pay for Stars and now AMC. They do a genuine dis service to the people making these films by running the credits at 3x normal speed and covering up the music that someone paid to have written. Titles aren't free either you know and when they squash them into a tiny keystone box on the right 1/3rd of my screen, that just makes me mad.

Why don't the people that make this art form stand up and protect their works from such practices? Surely there has to be a way for folks like Ron Howard and Rob Reiner to keep their films whole or at least not run over at the end.

They should also stand up to practices like this. Musical artists should also take a stand against Sony for their "root kit" issue with DRM music. We the viewers can do this if we band together but it's going to take a whoile bunch of us not buying CDs and DVDs to get them to even notice. I think it would hurt more if the producers, directors, writers and musicians said they weren't going to produce under these situations.

Sean McHenry

Totally disagree with Sony, but I see many issues in this post Sean. I think you are very conflicted with this! Artists who wish to keep their work pure need only to keep it strictly to themselves. If you chose commercial gain from your work, expect change.

Mike

[Sean McHenry]

I will never understand why we insist on drawing a line and saying "OK, art on this side and commercial profit on that side." Surely there is a way to have both.

For those that think credits are an apparent waste of time, wait until you try to shoot a big budget feature or even a 28:30 TV show without doing credits. That's a huge put down to the cast and crew that worked on your little profit vehicle.

I think everyone should be counted that had a hand in the production and apparently so do the unions and the directors and producers, distributors, musicians... Make a few shows without giving credit to the people in the programs and see how many times they come back to help, especially the ones working on defered payment for thier services.

All I am saying is that the credits are there and as much a part of the content as anything else. Somebody paid for that time. That part of the film has important information and some of it is there for legal reasons. That part at the end has a musical score runining under it and somebody paid quite a bit of money for the titles as they aren't done in Photoshpop if it makes it to actual film. It's part of the content and I wouldn't want my content fooled with. Somebody paid for that film footage, processing, duplication, distribution, etc. Heck, we could all save time and money if we just left them off then.

If you did a snappy piece for a wedding and really put your heart into it, and that makes it art to me, then you find out the people you made it for had it recut because grandma wasn't going to sit through the entire piece and they made shortened, edited for time, versions for their friends, etc, it is no longer the work you created.

Sean

[Patrick Jenkins]

For those that think credits are an apparent waste of time, wait until you try to shoot a big budget feature or even a 28:30 TV show without doing credits. That's a huge put down to the cast and crew that worked on your little profit vehicle.

I've done quite a number of smaller and lower budget features, I've done big TV work, regardless of the money I still want to see my name in the credits. But that was exactly part of my point. "The only people who really like watching credits are the people who are in them or related/affliated with [the project] - or obsessive-compulsive types [where not having the credits makes it an incomplete experience]." For your average movie-enjoying target audience, the credits are the signal where it's time to leave. On TV, it signals it's time to go take a break or get food or whatever before the next thing comes on. Should credits be reacted to differently? Sure. But unfortunately that's how people view them now.

It's a balance between what appeals to the audience (because that's ultimately the $$ goal), what is profitable and also what was the original creative intent. It's just how the world works.

[Danny Fye]

Originally Posted by Patrick Jenkins

The only people who really like watching credits are the people who are in them or related/affliated with or obsessive-compulsive types.

I disagree, I like to listen to the beautiful music at the end of some of the movies. I get extremely annoyed with Starz/Encore when they put their upcoming show ads in the credits. I want to relax and hear the music, not Robin Williams yelling, "Good Morning Vietnam".

I no longer subsribe to Starz or Encore and I won't again until they stop doing this.

I'd be very upset if someone did that to the credits on my productions.

As for Sony, what they are doing is destroying any trust in them and hurting the chances that Blue-Ray will become the standard. No-telling what they may try to 'secretly' put in Blue-Ray or at least movies intended for it. They did it to the music CD's, they can do it to the movie DVD's.

Sony needs to stop the baloney...

Danny Fye
www.dannyfye.com

[Eric Elliott]

Originally Posted by Sean McHenry

Why don't the people that make this art form stand up and protect their works from such practices?
Sean McHenry

Because there's an uncounted number of people waiting in line for their place who are perfectly willing to roll over for the suits. Even the most famous don't usually have the power to stand up to the money guys, even if they cared to do so.