Harry Potter released unprotected
Harry Potter released unprotected
13:40 13 June 02 NewScientist.com news service
Warner Home Video has chosen not to copy-protect the home versions of its blockbuster movie Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone in major markets, including the US and UK. This means people can go out and buy a DVD or VHS, connect the analogue output of their player to a recorder - either analogue or digital - and make free copies for friends.
Usually, hot new movies are protected by Macrovision, which tinkers with the analogue picture signal so that it can be viewed on a TV set but not copied.
So, is this just a test or has at least one industry giant decided, as the software industry learned long ago, that the cost of copy protection often exceeds its value. Time to short Macrovision (MVSN, NASDAQ NM)? In the past year the stock has dropped from about $72 to about $14. I wonder if their $1.00 drop in price on today's opening reflects this news? steve
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Schear" <schear@lvcm.com>
Harry Potter released unprotected
So, is this just a test or has at least one industry giant decided, as the software industry learned long ago, that the cost of copy protection often exceeds its value.
I believe it's a test. The studio has determined that Harry Potter has already made a (sizable) profit, so using it for an experiment is acceptable. By testing on a big budget target they can now determine if copy-protection costs exceed value.
Time to short Macrovision (MVSN, NASDAQ NM)? In the past year the stock has dropped from about $72 to about $14. I wonder if their $1.00 drop in price on today's opening reflects this news?
I don't think so, not yet at least. This looks like just a pilot program. Watch the normal piracy channels though, if Harry Potter shows up stronger than other releases Macrovision will be around a while. But if Harry Potter isn't substantially hit by piracy, then you might want to start shorting Macrovision, they'll start losing customers. Joe
Joseph Ashwood wrote:
This looks like just a pilot program. Watch the normal piracy channels though, if Harry Potter shows up stronger than other releases Macrovision will be around a while. But if Harry Potter isn't substantially hit by piracy, then you might want to start shorting Macrovision, they'll start losing customers.
I am confused. AFAICT, the majority of movie piracy today takes place via DivX from DVD's. How does Macrovision even play a role in this? Thanks, --Lucky
At 01:44 PM 6/16/2002 -0700, Lucky Green wrote:
Joseph Ashwood wrote:
This looks like just a pilot program. Watch the normal piracy channels though, if Harry Potter shows up stronger than other releases Macrovision will be around a while. But if Harry Potter isn't substantially hit by piracy, then you might want to start shorting Macrovision, they'll start losing customers.
I am confused. AFAICT, the majority of movie piracy today takes place via DivX from DVD's. How does Macrovision even play a role in this?
Macrovision only prevents some VCRs from recording DVD content, a decreasing market. Video "correctors" are widely available for under $60 to neuter Macrovision protection. All DVD ripping SW bypasses any Macrovision protection. steve
----- Original Message ----- From: "Lucky Green" <shamrock@cypherpunks.to>
Joseph Ashwood wrote:
This looks like just a pilot program. Watch the normal piracy channels though, if Harry Potter shows up stronger than other releases Macrovision will be around a while. But if Harry Potter isn't substantially hit by piracy, then you might want to start shorting Macrovision, they'll start losing customers.
I am confused. AFAICT, the majority of movie piracy today takes place via DivX from DVD's. How does Macrovision even play a role in this?
In it's realistic form, Macrovision has nothing to do with any of it. However since it is current industry protocol to use Macrovision copy-protection, Macrovision is of interest. In truth, this isn't even a question of copy-protection, there's plenty of evidence that none of that works. Instead this is about a technology, and a company, the technology is the Macrovision copy-protection technology, and the company explicitly involved is Macrovision. Macrovision makes the bulk of their profits from this copy-protection technology, and since it is a copy-protection technology it is of general interest to many cypherpunks, even if not in any real way. (see the other reply regarding picture corrections). Because of Macrovision's heavy reliance on the copy-protection technology for profits, an undermining of that critical asset will greatly diminish the value of the company, and so diminish the stock price. For any other purpose, there's basically no reason for this thread at all. Hope this helped a bit. Joe
participants (3)
-
Joseph Ashwood -
Lucky Green -
Steve Schear