“Hollywood studios will start selling digital versions of films such as ‘Brokeback Mountain’ and ‘King Kong’ on the Internet this week, the first time major movies have been available online to own. The films can’t be burned onto a disc for viewing on a DVD player. Still, the move is seen as a step toward full digital distribution of movies over the Internet. Six studios said they would announce Monday that sales will begin through the download Web site Movielink. The site is jointly owned by five of the seven major studios,” Gary Gentile reports for The Associated Press. “Warner Bros., Universal Pictures, Sony Pictures, Paramount Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox and MGM will offer some first-run and older titles on Movielink. New films will be priced similar to DVDs — between US$20 and $30 — while older titles will sell for $10 to $20… Studios will sell some new films online the same day they become available on DVD. Most films will be made available within 45 days.”
“The films available on Movielink can be stored indefinitely on a computer hard drive or transferred to as many as two other computers. The movies can be played on a TV if the computer is part of a home network. A copy can be burned to a DVD as a backup. Discs can be played on up three PCs authorized by Movielink but cannot be viewed on a standard DVD player because of special security coding,” Gentile reports. “Consumers will not be able to transfer the films from a PC or laptop to a handheld portable viewing device, but that capability should be available sometime within the next year, Ramo said.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Movielink does not support Mac or Linux. “In order to enjoy the Movielink service, you must use Windows 2000 or XP, which support certain technologies we utilize for downloading movies,” Movielink’s web site explains. Movielink has divided its Web site (http://www.movielink.com) into two “stores,” with a common home page. The two storefronts function just as the Movielink original “Rental Store” operated, but the license to view a movie obtained from the “Purchase Store” allows for unlimited viewing. The movie may be permanently stored on the hard drive to create a permanent archive, or burned to a disc in Windows Media format for backup or playback on up to two additional tethered computers. The movies can also be downloaded to a notebook computer for traveling. Using a Media Center Edition PC, consumers can stream their copy of the movie to a TV set connected to a media center extender or Xbox.
Advertisements:
• Apple’s brand new iPod Hi-Fi speaker system. Home stereo. Reinvented. Available now for $349 with free shipping.
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• MacBook Pro. The first Mac notebook built upon Intel Core Duo with iLife ’06, Front Row and built-in iSight. Starting at $1999. Free shipping.
• iMac. Twice as amazing — Intel Core Duo, iLife ’06, Front Row media experience, Apple Remote, built-in iSight. Starting at $1299. Free shipping.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
poor Mac users! Always left out of the fun.
So the backlash begins.
Lets see, FairPlay is Apple’s DRM and it is restrictive.
But Microsofts DRM is “open” because of their marketshare.
This sucks!
Be smart Apple. Forces are lining up against you and I need you to win in the long run.
Hollywood is cleverer than the record companies, that’s for certain. Give M$ a head start to counterbalance the iTunes juggernaut, then play the two off against each other to maximise the profits.
Very clever indeed.
It looks like Apple missed the boat for movie downloads. I doubt studios will let them sell through iTunes if they own this website.
Oh well…
Mac users need not apply BECAUSE APPLE DOES NOT LICENCSE FAIRPLAY.
Isn’t $20-$20 kind of steep???
when it comes to movies sony has the edge, steve jobs knows this that is why dreamworks and pixar merged. However pixar and dreamworks can only satisfy PG audience. SONY on the other hand has content for everyone with movies like SPIDERMAN.
SONY VS. APPLE.
Sony definetly has the edge but they need to make the good moves.
Another Mac lockout. As I posted elsewhere, it has the odor of arrogance to it. More significantly, it would seem to indicate an intentional and rather broad attempt by a wide range of corporate interests to hit pretty hard at Apple.
Note that Disney is not in the list.
In any case, like all other Internet-based attempts by Movielink, this too will fail.
Because people think it is too expensive relative to retail stores (new releases or discount bins). Because people don’t put big Windows MCE PCs in the living room, and extenders are too expensive and complicated. Because people can’t easily put it on easy-to-use portable devices.
Who cares? Who wants to spend $20 on something they can only view on their PC Monitor? It’s stupid.
SONY
point taken but dreamworks didn’t merge with pixar. disney bought pixar.
(An) idiot wrote:
“Mac users need not apply BECAUSE APPLE DOES NOT LICENCSE FAIRPLAY.”
More likely, the studios know they’ll sell primarily to people with Media Center PC’s and since Apple doesn’t have a dedicated media center (the mini comes close but has nowhere near the penetration of MS Media Center), they’re left out for now.
“poor Mac users! Always left out of the fun.”
Yeah, like virus’ and worms and all that FUN stuff…..boo whoo
“playback on up to two additional tethered computers”
Huh? tethered to what? themselves, ball and chain, your dog??
They are trying to get the jump on Apple, BUT as usual they don’t get it.
Why would I pay 20-30 for something with lots of restrictions, when I could go to Walmart and get the same thing WITHOUT the restrictions.
The Greedy idiots need to learn how to do a pricing scheme.
From Canada, you can’t even get into the MovieLink site to take a look around. It redirects to a canadian based movie rental website.
Until movie downloads via the internet are equal to DVD quality wouldn´t one be a real idiot to buy one via the internet?
There are lots of alternatives to downloading movies.
No go outside the borders of the USA.
These Studios have simply done now what Apple isn’t ready to do – let consumers download movies. When Apple is ready, as long as they follow the same “security” guidelines, these Studios will allow Apple to distribute their movies through iTunes.
Why? They want money and a distribution deal through iTunes means another source of income – one they don’t currently have. Even if it takes some customers away from their website, it still represents cash.
Apple just needs an appealing model in iTunes, a pricing scheme the studios and consumers will go for and then Mac users will be able to have their cake and eat it too…
As for Linux…well maybe one day Apple will release an iTunes version for the penguins…
Wouldn’t want to pay for the server farms and bandwidth required to be able to download feature length movies of a decent resolution. The studios get most of that $20 to $30. There is no room for profit if you are not selling the movie viewer a la iPod/iTunes Music Store.
They will stay in business until they run out of the investors money.
Looks like Disney may well be the one who will get to show the rest of the studios how to do a decent and desirable digital distibution. It actually may turn out to be a far greater opportunity than first appearances would seem to indicate.
idiot is half right. The other half is that DRMed Windows Media audio or video doesn’t work on Macs because nobody has made a player to do so.
Apple certainly wants to sell movies through iTMS. But Steve won’t do it until he’s sure the conditions are such that it will appeal to consumers. Right now, several things are wrong with Movielink:
– high price
– no portability
– inconsistent usage rights (the “up to 2 other computers” is on a case-by-case basis – see terms of service)
– too long to download? (can someone find the resolution of the movies? is it compressed? can someone test how long it takes to download?)
The other good news is that Disney is not part of this. So it’s possible that Disney/Pixar and Apple are gearing up for the iTMS movie debut alongside the real iPod video, and the next generation Front Row. When it becomes the only successful approach, the other studios will come in.
“In the study of economics, collusion takes place within an industry when rival companies cooperate for their mutual benefit. Collusion most often takes place within the market form of oligopoly, where the decision of a few firms to collude can significantly impact the market as a whole. Cartels are a special case of explicit collusion. Collusion which is not overt, on the other hand, is known as tacit collusion.”
“A cartel is a group of legally independent producers whose goal it is to fix prices, to limit supply and to limit competition. Cartels are prohibited by antitrust laws in most countries; however, they continue to exist nationally and internationally, formally and informally. Note that a single entity that holds a monopoly by this definition cannot be a cartel, though it may be guilty of abusing said monopoly in other ways. As such, it is inaccurate to describe (for example) Microsoft or AT&T as cartels.”
Calling the DoJ
“In the study of economics, collusion takes place within an industry when rival companies cooperate for their mutual benefit. Collusion most often takes place within the market form of oligopoly, where the decision of a few firms to collude can significantly impact the market as a whole. Cartels are a special case of explicit collusion. Collusion which is not overt, on the other hand, is known as tacit collusion.”
“A cartel is a group of legally independent producers whose goal it is to fix prices, to limit supply and to limit competition. Cartels are prohibited by antitrust laws in most countries; however, they continue to exist nationally and internationally, formally and informally. Note that a single entity that holds a monopoly by this definition cannot be a cartel, though it may be guilty of abusing said monopoly in other ways. As such, it is inaccurate to describe (for example) Microsoft or AT&T as cartels.”
Calling the DoJ
“In the study of economics, collusion takes place within an industry when rival companies cooperate for their mutual benefit. Collusion most often takes place within the market form of oligopoly, where the decision of a few firms to collude can significantly impact the market as a whole. Cartels are a special case of explicit collusion. Collusion which is not overt, on the other hand, is known as tacit collusion.”
“A cartel is a group of legally independent producers whose goal it is to fix prices, to limit supply and to limit competition. Cartels are prohibited by antitrust laws in most countries; however, they continue to exist nationally and internationally, formally and informally. Note that a single entity that holds a monopoly by this definition cannot be a cartel, though it may be guilty of abusing said monopoly in other ways. As such, it is inaccurate to describe (for example) Microsoft or AT&T as cartels.”
Calling the DoJ
“In the study of economics, collusion takes place within an industry when rival companies cooperate for their mutual benefit. Collusion most often takes place within the market form of oligopoly, where the decision of a few firms to collude can significantly impact the market as a whole. Cartels are a special case of explicit collusion. Collusion which is not overt, on the other hand, is known as tacit collusion.”
“A cartel is a group of legally independent producers whose goal it is to fix prices, to limit supply and to limit competition. Cartels are prohibited by antitrust laws in most countries; however, they continue to exist nationally and internationally, formally and informally. Note that a single entity that holds a monopoly by this definition cannot be a cartel, though it may be guilty of abusing said monopoly in other ways. As such, it is inaccurate to describe (for example) Microsoft or AT&T as cartels.”
Calling the DoJ
I wonder what type of security software is going to be installed on the download that will be tracking what machines and where the films are bing copied to?????
Sooonnnnnyyy rooootttkit
movie link has a “suggestion” link.
Here’s mine:
“Umm… How about a pine box for yourself.
You’re going to need it.”
their logo is evil …
did u guys see their logo?
This is not a Hollywood conspiracy against iTunes or Apple. Hollywood would LOVE to sell movies to Mac and Win users. It is MS who won’t allow protected MWA movies to play on Macs, so it is an MS conspiracy that MS is being forced to play.
You see MS MUST gamble that not releasing WMA on Macs will force the consumer to choose Windows, otherwise if MS fails and consumers stick with their iPods and (God forbid for MS!) buy Macs they will lose control over the customer forever.
In other words… ALSO similar to DVDs. Same price, lower quality, less usable, not iPod-compatible, not Mac-compatible.
Note to Hollywood: you need two things to make this work.
Apple
and lower pricing
It just hit me: this is going to be a huge flop. Why? Well, what does this service really offer that’s better than what people have already? A little, but not much.
iTMS was not a hit just because it offered music online. It was a hit because…
— It offered music at a cheaper price than buying a CD.
— It allowed you to buy only the songs you were interested in.
— It offered music you might not be able to find at Best Buy et al.
— It quickly got the music onto the device on which you were most likely to listen to it (your iPod).
— It allowed you to burn a CD for your stereo or car.
This Movielink service offers the convenience of not having to go to the store, but that’s it. There’s no other advantage.
— It costs about full retail to buy the movie (new “hot” DVDs at Best Buy often cost $15 or less).
— No portable player transfer.
— No DVD burn for your living room or minivan.
Who’s going to want this? The only thing that could fire interest in such a service would be if the studios added the majority of their back catalog. Barring that, this service will be forgotten in six months, and Jobs will use its failure to convince the studios to do it his way.
Bit torrent it is then!
Once again, the pornography industry will drive the the technology. (Think of the real reason why VHS beat Beta, etc.). Here is an article about a download service that will let you burn to DVD – once and only once.
http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,70547-0.html?tw=rss.technology
(No mention if it is Mac compatible though.)
So why is that the pornographers can get it right (that’s technology, not content) and Hollywood, with infinitely more money, cannot? Maybe Robin Williams was right: “Cocaine is God’s way of telling you that you have too much money.”
Wasn’t part of the reason Apple built the iPod (and iTunes) that none of the other music players/media services were compatible with the Mac? This is just going to drive Apple to do the same thing, but do it better. And Jobs’ ties with Disney are going to help start it. Sure, “High School Musical” sucked, but it was a test case — imagine if Disney opened their vaults and you could put classics like “Snow White” and “Cinderella” on the hard drive. You wouldn’t need a DVD player in your car…just put your 17in PowerBook in the back seat for the kids. (Maybe some enterprising person will come up with a laptop power supply that utilizes the old cigarette lighter…) And how about variable pricing — a low-res version for, say, $10, and a higher-res version for $20? Maybe even allow the higher-res version to be burned on a DVD…
I sure would be interested to hear what the real-world download times are for full length movies from this service. I’ll betcha it’s a whole lot faster and cheaper to go to the local discounter and pick it up on your next shopping trip. It’s an order of magnitude cheaper to rent it instead of buy it, since most of us only choose to watch a movie once. Again, I’ll bet it’s just as fast to use one of the “delivered to your door” rental services as downloading. Certainly, instant gratification is not possible with the download model.
And you can’t watch it on your TV. I am the only person I know who routinely watches movies on computer. None of my friends would even consider such a thing.
Oh. And they are charging WAY TOO MUCH MONEY!!!!!!
I grade this effort with an “F”. For Future Failure.
who gives a sheet? i mean really… downloading feature length films for too much $$$… just step out to the corner and rent it… at the risk of sounding like a fanboy: i’ll wait for Apple to offer movies the right way.
Not only they don’t support Mac but also not the any other browser but <u>IE</u>.
This what i get when I go there with Vista running Mozilla engin:
“Sorry, but in order to enjoy the Movielink service you must use Internet Explorer 5.0 or higher, which supports certain technologies we utilize for downloading movies. Click here to get the latest version of Internet Explorer.
We do not support Mozilla or Netscape. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.”
I heard that George Soros recently paid several hundred million US$ for rights to a movie catalogue. Might he license his titles to iTunes?
“Why would I pay 20-30 for something with lots of restrictions, when I could go to Walmart and get the same thing……
Agreed. The quality of these full movie downloads is going to suck because they are going to have to compress the shit out of them. FULL DVD quality will require fiber to the curb (we’re talking 4-5000 Kbps SUSTAINED). PERIOD. And that’s for STANDARD DVD quality – not HD. There just isn’t enough bandwidth to accommodate full quality and pipe it all out. By the time my download is done (on broadband cable), I could drive to a store and buy the DVD cheaper.
Its possible the studios have set this up to fail on purpose to boost DVD sales which are lagging. Yes, the argument that its faster and cheaper and less restrictive to run to the bargain bin at Wal Mart is true and these studios know this.