Latest Bad Info on HDV

JJKizak wrote on 10/11/2005, 5:06 PM
Latest magazine says XP will not be compatible with Blu-Ray. Also must purchase new Vista OS with anti piracy software to show HDV. Also must purchase new monitor with new chips or cannot show HDV. Any equipment without new chips cannot show HDV period. Blu-Ray looks for special chips in software and monitor and if it can't find it no play hdv and will send it out at 480 downsized.

JJK

Comments

fldave wrote on 10/11/2005, 5:51 PM
Do you have a reference link?

Edited: I think what you are referring to is the proposed "enhancements" to MS Vista, and specifically, to HD in general, not to HDV specifically.
rmack350 wrote on 10/11/2005, 5:52 PM
Quote some sources.

If your new monitor uses an HDMI cable then it's also equipped with HDCP (If I've got the alphabet soup right)

Basically, the two devices (player and monitor) must be able to exchange a handshake before the display card will send an HD stream. I would expect the handshake to be between the video card and the monitor but maybe the OS or the disc drive will have to do it.

What I had read about Vista was that MS would support the HD DVD disc format natively in Vista but not Blueray-mainly because they didn't feel like they had time. They were also saying that this didn't preclude other vendors from providing third party support.

Regarding the handshake, when I was going over HDCP with some HP folks this summer we were under the impression that an HDCP equipped tv would still accept an HD signal from a non HDCP equipped source, but not the other way around (the HDCP equipped source won't output HD over HDMI cable unless it can handshake. If you've got DVI output and input then you can go that way)

Rob Mack
JohnnyRoy wrote on 10/11/2005, 5:53 PM
I think your subject hit the nail right on the head. Sounds like a bunch of Bad Info if you are talking about HDV. HD DVD vs Blu-Ray is another story.

~jr
Yoyodyne wrote on 10/11/2005, 6:02 PM
HDCP is going to be quite controversial it seems to me. I know they are trying to close the "analog hole" but quite a few early adopters that spent huge bucks on early plasmas and projectors that just have analog inputs are not too happy.
riredale wrote on 10/11/2005, 8:27 PM
I am surprised that these folks are continuing to dig themselves deeper and deeper with more restrictions. Why will anybody support a new standard that completely obsoletes expensive big-screen monitors currently being sold? Hollywood, it seems, has been burned by DeCSS and is overreacting by insisting on complete and total security. Continuing to do so will seal the fate of any new standard it proposes.
Steve Mann wrote on 10/11/2005, 9:08 PM
I've seen the same information in a couple of home theater magazines. There's lots of articles about buillding your own PVRs using off the shelf components. It's been mentioned in many of them that you will have to upgrade to Windows Vista if you plan on watching Blu-Ray discs.

I do recall something about first-generatioh HD displays not being able to display digital HD, but since I can't afford HD anyway, I just ignored the articles.

It has to do with control. BluRay ACP (Advanced Copy Protection) requires a handshake with the hardware. That means device drivers for Blu-Ray and Microsoft has decided that they won't spend the resources to develop them for XT. (After all, if you can afford BluRay and HD, then the cost of Vista is incidental).

Steve
MH_Stevens wrote on 10/11/2005, 9:28 PM
Seems us board members are moving into a position of conflict of interest. It's going to be difficult for fair minded independents producers to continue to support a Sony product as the Studio moves back into the days of Hollywood's monopoly and represents the erosion of consumers rights and technological innovation. Any one have a response?



FrigidNDEditing wrote on 10/11/2005, 11:25 PM
All I know is that it seems to me that from what I've heard, Windows XP may be the best OS made since/near future time frame by microsoft - Vista is (from what I hear) supposed to be chock full of copyright this and that blah blah blah. Frustrating things like that are very ... well ... frustrating - I get sick of all this junk that they put on us. I don't think it will affect me in anyway necessarily - but COME ON, I just get cheesed off by these things that are potentially going to make it harder and harder to use my computer how I want.

Dave

- just the rantings of my lunacy -
fwtep wrote on 10/11/2005, 11:48 PM
Yes Dave, it's frustrating and annoying... until YOU have product out there that you're hoping to earn some money with.

Fred
farss wrote on 10/12/2005, 2:31 AM
I seem to recall some push for legislation banning HD set top boxes that used component outputs to stop anyone from recording off air.
But all these hair brained ideas still overlook the simple fact that if we can watch it then we can record it, even if that means a camera in front of a monitor.
All they're achieving is helping out the organised crime networks by ensuring they're the only ones with the means to buy the expensive gear needed to make 'illegal' copies.
Bob.
JJKizak wrote on 10/12/2005, 5:30 AM
I did get some of my facts confused. BluRay only and not HDV, at least I think thats right.

JJK
Jay Gladwell wrote on 10/12/2005, 5:34 AM

Everyone keeps bringing up the Beta debacle, but Sony seems to have learned nothing from it. If so, they've chosen to ignore it... again.


JohnnyRoy wrote on 10/12/2005, 7:06 AM
> I seem to recall some push for legislation banning HD set top boxes that used component outputs to stop anyone from recording off air.

The genie is out of the bottle. You can’t put the cork back in. Consumers have been recording their shows off-air for decades now. If they take that away, the people won’t buy it. It will only server to increase the sale of illegal boxes to defeat whatever protection scheme they use. And I guarantee you, the public will not see it as a crime to use them. They will rationalize it as taking back what is already theirs. The government and movies industry need to wake up to the fact that you can’t take away the functionality that consumers are already use to.

> All they're achieving is helping out the organised crime networks by ensuring they're the only ones with the means to buy the expensive gear needed to make 'illegal' copies.

Exactly Bob. It will be like the US National Prohibition of Alcohol from 1920-33. Designed to reduce crime all it did was increase it. You think people are stealing cable now? Wait until they loose their right to record off-air. Set-top decoders will be flooding eBay and everyone will have them.

~jr
Laurence wrote on 10/12/2005, 8:22 AM
Another thing that this will do is spur people on to buy cheap Chinese new format players (with protection hacks on the Internet) instead of established American or Japanese brands. Throughout the world, more people are going to continue to be watching pirated than legitamate copies of movies, and rather than crushing foreign piracy, these efforts will encourage Americans to pirate as well. There's something about charging $24 for a 20 cent piece of plastic that just rubs people the wrong way.

If the major companies would just drop copy protection entirely and lower the prices of discs to say $9.99, they would make so much money they just wouldn't believe it! Most Americans would pay that much for the packaging and extra quality of the pressed disc and much of the piracy problem would simply evaporate. Outside the US, a lot more legitamate discs would be sold as well.
MH_Stevens wrote on 10/12/2005, 8:37 AM
FRED: I think you are wrong.

Though "Harry Potter" and "Shriek" are going to loose a few bucks (which is nothing compared to the over-pricing and advertising they use to rip off our children) there will be no significant theft of docs or serious film because the people who eat the good stuff generally just ain't thieves. These protections are all for the benefit of the Hollywood monopolies and are a negative for the small independent who may soon find themselves back where they were in 1960.

Mike
fwtep wrote on 10/12/2005, 9:52 AM
> FRED: I think you are wrong.
> These protections are all for the benefit of the Hollywood monopolies

Mike,
My movie was available illegally online the day it was released. So far I have not made one single penny from my percentage and have not recouped my costs on the movie. I am not a big Hollywood studio, I'm as independent as they come. So don't tell me piracy doesn't hurt.

As for your comment that piracy doesn't hurt "the good stuff" because people who are into good films aren't the type to pirate, that may be true, but it's still a bad situation because there aren't enough people like that to make a profit. Who's going to spend the money that it takes even for a low budget film knowing that they're going after such a small audience? And it would splinter and be even smaller if there was lots of good product out there. (By the way, I don't characterize my film as "good stuff" in the way you mean it, just so you know.)

Simple fact: Piracy hurts the people who need the money most. It may not hurt the big studios directly (meaning that the executives are still making big salaries), but it hurts people like you and me.

I HAVE a film on the market (distributed by Sony), so I know. Until you have one out there and it gets pirated you really can't know how it will affect your ability to pay your rent. And just FYI, I'm not stupid enough to think I was going to get rich off my film; I'm not thinking that I was going to be a millionaire. Nor do I think that every illegal download of my movie would have been a sale if the pirated version wasn't available; but even if only 5-10% of the people who got it illegally had to buy it I'd be in a much better situation right now.

Lastly, I'm not stupid enough to think that piracy can be completely stamped out. But ignoring it and not making ANY attempt to stop it would be stupid.

Fred
MH_Stevens wrote on 10/12/2005, 10:55 AM
Thanks for your reply Fred.

I accept you have first-hand knowledge I don't. I am somewhat surprised by what you are telling me about the pirating of your film. Without knowing the subject matter and the intended audience of your film I can say little more. Can you identify a class of persons who have pirated your film and rate them as potential buyers or not? As with software I have always held that the vast majority of pirated stuff (except for popular films and software that sell on the street corner) is prankish and only used by persons who would never have paid money for the product anyway. That is why I considered only big name films are really the losers. I am not saying you are not hurt by pirates - I am saying that given the chance the big studios would hurt you more.

I appreciated your reply Fred and I'm listening if you wish reply again.

Mike
FrigidNDEditing wrote on 10/12/2005, 10:57 AM
I don't do that kind of work for the most part fwtep - but if I did, I'm sure it would frustrate me some, however those that pirate wouldn't buy in the first place, so I say sue em when you can and arrest the big boys - maybe even a few of the small timers and home folks (if you really wanna piss of the public, which it seams that the hollywood/music industry likes to do these days) and then just keep doing what they're doing - it's an information age - you can't stop it, it's hard to slow it down too, since it's speeding up, but eventually - sombody's going to just have to give up. I'm curious as to which side it will be.

Dave
Spot|DSE wrote on 10/12/2005, 11:11 AM
As with software I have always held that the vast majority of pirated stuff (except for popular films and software that sell on the street corner) is prankish and only used by persons who would never have paid money for the product anyway.

O' were it only that were true. Because of the anonymity of the internet, software and media piracy are rampant at *all* social levels. It's not just kids any longer. It's the dentist up the street, it's the lawyer that loves certain sports or comedy releases, it's a lot of people that are partially ignorant, and partially of the "a little theft doesn't hurt anyone" mindset. "Oh, it won't hurt if I give a copy of this movie to my 2 buddies (who then promptly copy it for their 2 buddies)
Piracy is huge, and getting larger. If it were only China and certain areas of Scandanavia that were responsible for it all, that would be one thing. But it's not. It's pervasive, and if you don't see that, then you're not working or living in reality. Go to a swap meet, flea market, or large weekend festival (or on the streets of NYC) and you will find blockbuster movies and B-grade movies for sale for very cheap. Made here in the USA by enterprising people using software they likely bought at their local CompUSA.
I was recently at the home of a fairly well known Broadway play producer, and he had a stack of DVDs in sleeves in his guest house, all movies that he personally, had ripped and made copies of for guests. His reasoning? "I bought a legit copy and made a copy so my guests could have one too. That way I don't have to worry about the DVD's walking out the door because I have the original."
So, while copyright protection might always eventually fail, so do locks on the doors to your home, if someone wants to get in badly enough. Mike, you live fairly remotely like I do...do you have locks on your doors?
Piracy affects EVERYONE in some form, whether it's less convenient access to media or higher prices or locked out-legit uses of media.
How can anyone ever blame or chastise someone for trying to protect their investment and intellectual property?

To take Dayvid's view and say "Just sue em" doesn't strike a chord with reality. First, you gotta find em, then you gotta pony up at LEAST 10k or more to start a suit, and then distract yourself from reality for at least a year. Our stupid debacle with a well known community member stealing my trademarked name and our company domains has cost my company nearly 10k and 5 months of stress and frustration, not to mention distraction from doing what we do. And it's still not resolved. All that takes away from the original goal of making something, putting into the market, and enjoying the benefits of it. And even in the event of a successful recovery (which is virtually never likely, especially when dealing with scumbags and pirates) you're still out lost time, lost revenues, and lost emotional wellbeing, not to mention the lost sleep. I'd rather shut the door before the horse runs than try and chase the horse and the thief sitting on his back after they've long gone.
Jøran Toresen wrote on 10/12/2005, 12:15 PM
Douglas, you write: ” Piracy is huge, and getting larger. If it were only China and certain areas of Scandinavia that were responsible for it all, that would be one thing.”

Scandinavia consists of the three countries Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Do you really mean that the level of piracy activity in these countries can be compared to that of China?

Regards,
Joran
Spot|DSE wrote on 10/12/2005, 1:09 PM
I don't think anything could be comparable to China, but Scandinavia has more than its fair share of piracy-oriented businesses. However, FAIR, STOP, MPAA, and other organizations cite that Scandinavia has a disproportionately high number of warez sites, lawsuits, and networks than many other areas of similar populations. Russia is on the climb as well, and they're afraid as broadband continues to penetrate the US that the numbers will exponentially grow here, too.
Denmark, Sweden, and Norway all report music sales drops of greater than 35% in 2004, and it's expected to be that much again in 2005. There are no legitimate sales reports for China, but you can bet that for every one illegal download in Scandinavia, there are 100 in China. Conversely, the US reported a 5% growth in online CD (not download) sales. But broadband isn't as penetrated here yet.
There is a lot of speculation as to why Scandinavia is one of the leading geographic regions for piracy, but since that's changing, a lot of that speculation is probably changing too. Russia/Ukraine is climbing right up there next to China, which would probably put Scandinavia a distant third in the near future.
Jøran Toresen wrote on 10/12/2005, 1:29 PM
Thanks Douglas
I thought I lived in a ”civilized” country (Norway), but maybe I’m wrong (at least when it comes to piracy activity).

Joran
fwtep wrote on 10/12/2005, 1:59 PM
Mike,
You asked about the subject matter of my film. It's a "bigfoot" movie. I can't "identify a class of persons" who have pirated it because there's no way I can know that. But I'd say they're definitely the target audience-- for this simple reason: If they downloaded it, they wanted to see it. Again, I'm not saying that ALL downloads were missed sales. But it would be rather silly to think that not one single person who downloaded it would have bought or rented it if the download wasn't available.

Likewise with software. A few years ago I worked at a company that put out a software product. It ended up being cracked, and to use it you would download the software from our site, then apply the crack. Because of that, I was able to track how many downloads there were. In the weeks leading up to that, when the only downloads were from licensed users, we had about 3000 downloads. The day the crack went public (on forums and newsgroups) there were over 45,000 downloads. So there were 15x the number of cracked user as there were licensed users. And in this instance, I know that many of the users, perhaps 30-40%, would have bought it if there was no crack. At 30% that amounts to over 4 million dollars lost, or about $150,000 out of MY OWN pocket. And that doesn't even include further piracy.

People tend to think of all software companies as being huge money makers like Microsoft, so "what's a few sales here and there?" But that's not the way it is. Likewise, people pirate films like mine and think "no big deal, Sony's got plenty of money," but again, that's not the way it is. Here's the way it works: Sony still makes their money. I'm the one who loses out.

Fred
farss wrote on 10/12/2005, 2:52 PM
If one was into conspiracy theories you could suggest it'll never happen for the same reasons hard drugs will never be decriminalised, the crooks have too much money to loose.
There's a world of difference between the dentist down the road or the kid next door ripping off a copy and the organised crime mobs that are running large factories pressing out millions of copies.
At the moment the former is hurting the latters market at least in most western countries, stop the kid, dentist or the guy at the flea market and you're playing right into the hands of the mobs. Problem is the mobs take pretty drastic steps to protect their turf, we're no longer talking about loss of revenue, we're into loss of life issues.
And I'm not making idle speculation here, several of the movies I've been showing around Sydney for one client were ripped off and on the streets of Asia within days of the movie being finished. It wasn't released as a DVD until months later.
Theft of IP is a huge problem and it isn't just movies and CDs, it's everything from runners to golf clubs but CDs and DVDs are the most attractive for the mobs, easy to make, high margin and the sanctions are very mild. Customs knows a container load of heroin just shouldn't enter the country but a container load of DVDs, that much harder to identify. Even legit retailers have inadvertently been selling illegal copies, the copies are impossible to identify, they're perfect right down to the holograms.
Bob.