Slashdot Log In
Playstation 3 Video DRM Only Allows One Download
Posted by
Soulskill
on Mon Sep 22, 2008 02:09 PM
from the how-generous dept.
from the how-generous dept.
Nom du Keyboard points out an Ars Technica report that the Sony Video Store on the Playstation Network is running some rather restrictive DRM. When purchasing movies, users are allowed just one download — even if they delete the movie to make space and want to download it again on the same machine. A Sony representative told Ars that users could be issued an extra download as a "one-time courtesy" with help from customer support. Quoting:
"When we're discussing a system that seems to release new hardware configurations every few months and a company that actively encourages you to swap hard drives yourself, it appears users are going to run into problems if they ever decide they want to switch out their hard drive or even upgrade into a larger system; the information on the back-up utility makes it clear that video content can't be moved over to new system, although new hard drives should be safe. Sony claims that the PS3 is operating on a 10-year timeline: is one extra download, which you need to contact customer service to apply for, good enough for the next decade?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Oliver Twist anyone? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oliver Twist anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Oliver Twist anyone? (Score:4, Funny)
Duh!
It's pretty obvious he already has one, 'some more' would be redundant.
Parent
Re:Oliver Twist anyone? (Score:4, Interesting)
How can a first post be modded Redundant?
In this particular case, you're right, that shouldn't have been made redundant. That said, it's totally possible for a first post to be redundant. Here are a few examples:
"I just want a cell phone that only makes calls!"
"Does it run Linux?"
"Video game companies do this because you're all thieves!"
"...frickin shark!"
"George Lucas sucks."
"I hate the iPhone, so everybody else should too."
... and so on. There's a lot of repetitive noise here that doesn't become fresh just because it's in a different thread. This doesn't apply in your case, but it could a year from now when somebody carbon copies your post when another company has a policy like this.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I suppose for some users, it's seen as wasteful to mod A
Rental only (Score:5, Interesting)
As long as they clearly mark this as a rental, I'm OK with it. As soon as they describe it as a sale, then I think they're conducting felony fraud and should be prosecuted criminally.
Re:Rental only (Score:4, Insightful)
So if you buy something from a store, and then throw it away, the store is obligated to give you another item?
Interesting.
Parent
Re:Rental only (Score:4, Interesting)
If this item is broken, then yes they are required to replace it.
What happens if your PS3 stops working?
Parent
Re:Rental only (Score:5, Insightful)
So if i scratch up my cd or dvd, I'm entitled to a new one? Interesting..
Parent
Re:Rental only (Score:5, Insightful)
Depends, do you own the copy or did you license the copy.
-If you *own the copy* then you are screwed since you are allowed to do as you wish with the copy short of making copies of it. That includes trashing/destroying the disc.
-If you *license the copy* then you can get a replacement media copy or even copy another Good disc but keep the defective one as proof of license.
Parent
Re:Rental only (Score:5, Insightful)
If I purchase a copyrighted "something" at a store, I dang well expect that it would work on more than just the one machine I used it first in. If it's compatible, it should run in it.
I also expect that should I have to replace it more than once, the item still work.
Additionally, I expect that if someone is selling me something that restricts my rights as the purchaser under the cover of attempting to protect their own as the copyright holder, that those restrictions are reasonable and not simply in place as a surrogate method of forcing me to buy more copies of the item.
For the most part, the only thing DRM accomplishes is that, forcing the 'legitimate' consumer to purchase ever more copies of a work they already own copies.
Parent
Re:Rental only (Score:5, Insightful)
For the most part, the only thing DRM accomplishes is that, forcing the 'legitimate' consumer to purchase ever more copies of a work they already own copies.
You don't own it. It's hard to argue that you even own a license to it.
It is quite a funny concept that anything protected by authentication-based DRM can ever be "sold", since your use of what you "bought" is entirely controlled by someone else.
All that you really "buy" when you pay for DRM'd content is the right to keep asking, "dear rights holder, can you please tell my device it's okay for me to watch this?", and after that you have to cross your fingers. In most cases the answer is going to be "yes", or the economy of the system will fail massively. However, nothing guarantees that the answer will be "yes", and here we are discussing just one instance where perhaps it should be but isn't.
I agree with the OP, nobody should be allowed to misrepresent a DRM-encumbered transaction as a sale. You don't have most of the rights, use-wise or other, that are normally associated with a sale.
Parent
Re:Rental only (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not the issue here, the circumstances don't match.. If you buy something from a store you get a hard copy of the cd/dvd. You break it, tough luck.
When it comes to pc's, it's often not us that break them, or you want to upgrade or you've ran out of space. With this method they force you to lose your purchases with no possible way to transfer them, back them up to some form of removable media (the normal way people create more space on their computer) or redownload them. If you can't back them up and you have no space you HAVE to delete them, they are giving you no choice in the matter. These situations are unavoidable with a pc and if you provide a download service you should at least either provide unlimited downloads of your material, or you should be able to back them up easily (and legally).
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Except bandwidth isn't free. How many 4GB downloads should I allocate per customer? Should I factor that into the cost of the item? When you purchase something, should I factor in a lifetime of bandwidth usage by the customer?
Of course, you hit the nail on the head - you must be able to backup. Not having a backup (and this is probably the case given that the PS3 is encrypted) is stupid. Although, I think given "online activation" DRM seems to be the rage these days I don't think they have a problem wit
Re:Rental only (Score:5, Insightful)
If the content providers keep having their way then we'd be paying for media on a per-track, per-listen basis. Those ideas have been their wet dream even since before piracy was widespread.
That's my rationalization for reaching for the 'torrent, what's yours?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well Sony are the makers of Securom, and also made a DRM for DVD's (ARCOS) that rendered the disks unplayable on their own devices. I bought a movie with ARCOS for my nephews and it wouldn't play. I had to take said DVD and make a rip of it purely so they could watch the movie I bought for them on their Sony DVD player.
So crap like this no longer surprises me and is why, despite being a huge Metal Gear and Gran Turismo fan, I will not be buying a PS3.
Re:Rental only (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I'm all for companies like Sony forcing such intrusive DRM on the public.
The quicker they cross the line where it inconveniences your average consumer, the quicker we'll get to the point where DRM becomes a total flop.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
and often the video store ends up selling that off at discount.
.. We're not discussing that. We're discussing the fact that it *is* a rental, not the fact that the physical object get sold at a later point in time. Thanks for coming out, though.
Re:Their copyright should be toast (Score:4, Insightful)
The point is not that people want stuff for free. If you think that you're either being deliberately obtuse or are ignorant. The point is the scope and extent of copyright, especially in regards to consumer "purchases" which are actually just licenses according to "the man". There has long been an argument by "intellectual property" owners that we, the consumer, are not actually buying anything when we purchase a CD or game (fortunately book publishers do completely admit that when you buy a book, you can do what you want with it). The trouble is, if you're buying a license to use said music or software for any period of time, you should know your fucking rights beforehand. This is absolutely impossible now for the end user with the licenses and EULAs etc. Legalese has made it impossible for end users to make informed choices about purchases - the reason everyone just clicks yes is because they simply do not have enough time on this earth to read everything they agree to. Any kind of restrictive license aimed at end users is inherently shit purely because end users will not read the terms.
Video and DVD rental is obviously different because everyone already knows the basic terms of the rental. However, unreasonable terms on DVD rental (like, for example only being able to play it on one machine) are not expected.
Also, finishing each snide question with interesting? Shit.
Parent
Re:Rental only (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know any service in which one purchases content to be stores on you own media where a second download is allowed. Now, if one is not allowed to backup the content, or transfer it to another device, then that may be considered more restrictive than normal.
The entire point of DRM content is that the content is restricted to approved playback devices. Allowing multiple downloads to the only approved device is not the same as allowing someone to download it willy-nilly onto fifty computers.
The point this article is making is the lack of options to re-obtain your content, as you are not allowed to backup the media, nor can you store it physically on any kind of medium other than the disk in your playstation.
Parent
Courtosy download? (Score:5, Insightful)
How kind of them to privilage us with an extra download for something we paid for.
It almost feel like your renting a product, but never owning it.
Re:Courtosy download? (Score:4, Informative)
Why would anyone expect Sony to allow their bandwidth to be re-used for free?
Because a direct competitor (XBOX 360) allows me to download multiple times for anything I purchased. In fact, I have bought things, deleted them, and then when surfing the XBOX Live area and looking at those games it asks me if I want to download them AGAIN.
Parent
Apple do the same.. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Absolutely true.
But I can easily back up my music and video downloads to an external hard drive or DVD archive. When I want to restore them, I just load them back onto the machine.
For that matter, I can copy videos between my computers and still play them. It's true, those computers have to be "authorized" by Apple, up to a max of 5 computers (which I can reset/change each year). But I can still do it.
So Apple doesn't do *exactly* the same. It's DRM, and all DRM is bad. But Apple's doesn't leave quite the s
Re:Apple do the same.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, I'm frankly surprised this is news, given that iTunes' similar behavior -- with a much greater user base -- doesn't seem to merit a peep.
Parent
Re:Apple do the same.. (Score:5, Insightful)
iTunes doesn't lock your files down to a single machine though - they lock them to an account which can follow you effectively forever. Between computers, between devices, etc. Your account always is good to play your files. This allows you the specific freedom of BACKING UP your information.
Now, don't get me wrong, I don't like Apple's DRM either, but it HAS been the least problematic I've seen. Amazon Unbox for Video for example lets you play a "purchased" file on 2 machines only, and it has a terrible little Windows service that runs in the background to "authorize" your playback with the mothership. If that service screws up then your media files simply aren't going to play (and I've just deleted the 3 episodes of Battlestar Galactica I bought from them after all the problems I had with it).
I think with Sony, the problem is that you CAN'T make a backup of the file. You can with Apple, and you can with non-DRM'd media. As a matter of fact, I'd be fine with it if they didn't allow redownloads AT ALL if they didn't include DRM. I don't expect the store to give me a new copy of a DVD that I sit on or leave in a hot car, so I don't expect a new copy of a file that I lost either. HOWEVER, I do want the ability to make backup copies of that data so that I can be secure in the knowledge that my entire movie or song collection isn't hinging on a single hard drive crash.
The problem ALL this hits though, is that it's getting too device specific. If I want to play a DVD I buy it. I've been through 3 TV's and about 5 DVD players since I started buying DVD's. Now, digital downloads are looking to be the next bid thing, but look at the current scene: Xbox360 sells movies and TV shows, but they play only on an Xbox360. Apple does the same, but they play only through your computer or an AppleTV. Sony is now doing the same, but they play only through a PS3. Amazon Unbox does it - and they play only through Windows computers or a compatible Tivo.
How many disjointed systems is it going to take for them to realize that this isn't going to work? If I buy a new awesome media player box I want it to play EVERYTHING. I don't want to have to switch devices over and over as I flip between different movies I purchased on various systems. These devices need to operate with a common format. The only way to make this all work long term is to kill DRM. A user needs to be able to "own" and move about their files as easily as they once shifted around their DVD discs or VHS cassettes.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Couple that with the fact that iTunes doesn't officially support taking music off your iPod back onto iTunes and you've got a system that's a real pain in the arse.
Haven't installed iTunes 7 yet, huh?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The main difference is that it's trivially easy to back up your own iTunes library. Especially so if you own a recent Mac, where you can get an external hard drive and use Time Machine. Also, iTunes will allow you to copy your iTunes-purchased music from your iPod to your computer, but it will essentially replace your existing iTunes library. That in addition to being allowed to copy your iTunes purchased music/video to 5 different computers.
Don't get me wrong-- I'm generally anti-DRM and would very muc
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The main difference is that it's trivially easy to back up your own iTunes library.
From a customer-service perspective it seems to me that it would be even easier if Apple just supported re-downloads. Compare all the effort of each person individually backing up their shit versus the effort for apple to enable the feature and then support the occasional re-download.
You'd have to be mental.... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know what the prices are at the Sony Video Store - but if they are any substantial fraction of the cost of the physical media, then you should just buy the disc instead.
With the DRM on DVD a defeated minion of darkness, and BluRay certain to go the same way, the format with the most longevity, barring manufacturing defects, is a pressed ROM disc. You can be sure that you will be able to read, transcode, format-shift and enjoy these to your hearts content.
Not so for something that vanishes in a puff of virtual smoke when some vital component of your console goes "phut".
Less value for my money (Score:5, Insightful)
I intend to avoid downloadable content until it's at least as flexible as physical media. I want the ability to move my copy of a movie from machine to machine, and to lend it, give it or sell it to somebody else once I'm done with it. A one-time download is a sucker's deal.
So STUPID! (Score:5, Insightful)
No one learns anything from Valve/Steam. I was against Steam initially, but it's seductive because it's just so damn easy. All I have to do is log in, and it brings my games to me.
The lesson there to be learned is, if DRM makes your life easier, then people are more willing to put up with it. But if it makes your life harder? If it exists to screw you out of what you've already bought? Screw that.
Until the content providers remember that their supposed job is to provide CONTENT, then they're doomed to a declining market share and consumer antipathy.
Re:So STUPID! (Score:4, Insightful)
The nice thing with steam is that it is basically unlimited downloads/installs. Don't need to keep track of a disc or anything - just remember your username/password to Steam. You can even download the Steam client. And then all the games you've purchased on Steam are right there, ready to be (re)downloaded and (re)installed.
Very handy. It actually becomes more convenient, if you have a good Internet connection, to buy through Steam.
Of course there are lots of issues if you don't have working Internet...
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, I'm not a fan of DRM no matter what, but if you must have DRM, I think Steam is a pretty good model. As you mentioned, the DRM lets them makes it so they don't really have to worry about restricting downloads or copies. I broke down and bought the Orange Box on Steam, and it is kind of nice that I can have it installed on any machine I want, and be able to download it to additional machines at any time, the only restriction being that I have to sign in before I play it. That paired with assurances
Remember kids, digital downloads are the future! (Score:5, Insightful)
DVDs are dying! Blu-Ray is going nowhere! Why would anyone buy a real physical disk when for almost as much money you could use your limited bandwith allowance downloading a copy which will last unti the hard drive, or the console dies. Oh, and you don't get the extras. Erm, and it's unclear what happens if something goes wrong with the download. Oh, yeah, and you can probably download about 10 before you have to delete one.
WTF?
SONY? With DRM?? NOOOOOO!!!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Sony would NEVER do anything like that! [wikipedia.org]
Next you'll be telling me banks [uncyclopedia.org] are acting irresponsibly and the government [uncyclopedia.org] doesn't act in my interest!
Yikes. Just this weekend I upgraded my PS3 drive. (Score:5, Informative)
Simple Solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't download movies from Sony.
No downloads means no profit which means Sony will rethink their policy.
This is not DRM (Score:5, Informative)
Just stick with your PC (Score:3, Insightful)
I just rented my first movie through the PSN Store (Score:3, Insightful)
I will say, however, that this ONE download per purchased movie stuff is utter BS. Have they learned nothing from the Steam/Valve model?
But more damning, I think, is that the selection absolutely SUCKS. You could not cobble together a more random selection of (mostly) shitty movies/TV shows if you tried. It's really pathetic. There are some gems, but most of it is utter shit. I guess their target demographic are pubescent teens who think Wil Farrell is funny and "Step Brothers" should be on AFI's Top 100 list. There are a couple of Kubrick films (Eyes Wide Shut and A Clockwork Orange) which add a heavy weighted value to the selection, but still...
Who cares! (Score:5, Informative)
Seriously, not to be flamebait, but I have a Wii, and I can download.. uh.. wait.. GAMES!! and, the beauty is, if I delete it, I can download it again, for free, anytime, as long as it is on my console only.
That's the type of DRM I can live with. I mean, sure I wish I could load up my SD card and bring it to my friend's place who also has a Wii, but hey, you know, let's face it, I understand Why Nintendo stops me from going on with my SD card from machine to machine, and it's ok.
Now I don't get to play movies on my Wii.. boo hoo.. like I care, that's why I have a DVD player anyways. Beside, if the Wii ever went defective and it was my sole means of watching a movie, I would be in effect pretty damn bored!
Now, The PS3 let's you download movies only 1 time. That's Gestapo like DRM for you uh? :)
But who would want to download a movie for the PS3 anyways? especially with that type of DRM?
Better off buying a program like AnyDVD-HD which also support Blue-Ray and simply rent a movie and make a copy if you wish it.
DRM makes people's life a living hell, it's why it's not working.
Lesson in property (Score:5, Insightful)
If you don't control it, you don't own it.
No, no, a thousand times no! (Score:3, Funny)
Wait, I only get to say it the once?
DRM on downloadable games is broken too (Score:4, Insightful)
Anybody surprised? (Score:4, Insightful)
You'd think that with the BluRay+ features, that people would have a hint?
You'd think that with the rootkit fiasco, people would get a clue?
You'd think with the ATRAC format, and the way Sony MP3 players behaved in 'converting' ALL YOUR MUSIC, that it would be an iota of a hint...
Nope. We are all just idiots and want "bluray". It's exactly why I supported HD-DVD at the time. You reap what you sow.
Either way, I've been boycotting Sony on all fronts until their ways change.
Valve Steam (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not that hard. Steam is value-added DRM - which means the impetus to crack it is low. I've had pirated Half-Life, Half-Life 2 and Ep. 1, but Steam was easier than managing that (well, that and the games were worth every penny)
Steam has seen me through 3 computers and 8 OS reinstalls. I double-click a game and come back when it's 60% downloaded, and play it. That's worth money to me, even if it is stuck in my account and linked to their servers.
I don't see what's so hard about re-implementing Steam, aside from the fact that it doesn't allow the producer to double-dip (sell you a license when you try to copy it, but change it to a product when it breaks)
And I fear that's the crux of this whole thing - they're hoping that people will just re-buy.
Re:How is this surprising? (Score:5, Interesting)
Its news because not only is it DRM, but its poorly implemented. Steam and the 360 let you delete stuff you've bought and download it later. I can go to a friend's house, log in to my account on his xbox, and I'm able to download things I've bought.
The only reason this isn't really big news is because its something they can fix fairly easily.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Steam and the 360 let you delete stuff you've bought and download it later.
So does the PS3.... For everything but Movies. Which according the the Xbox live website is the same way it works on the 360. For movies.
Although at least Microsoft is kind enough to market them strictly as rentals.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)