Copy Protection Makes Dozens of Blu-Ray Titles Unplayable

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by whosbest54, Aug 24, 2010.

  1. whosbest54

    whosbest54 Guest

    whosbest54, Aug 24, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. whosbest54

    Mike S. Guest

    In article <-secrets.com>,
    whosbest54 <> wrote:
    >Another reason to hold off on adopting blu-ray. I'm still holding off.


    DVD had the same history. All it took was to buy a player from a company
    with a good record of support, with firmware updates of sufficient
    frequency to keep up with the new schemes. BD is more complicated, of
    course, but the situation is analogous.
     
    Mike S., Aug 25, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. whosbest54

    UCLAN Guest

    whosbest54 wrote:

    > Another reason to hold off on adopting blu-ray. I'm still holding off.
    >
    > <http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2010/08/24/24gigaom-copy-protect
    > ion-makes-dozens-of-blu-ray-titles-un-41787.html?ref=technology>
    >
    > or
    >
    > http://tinyurl.com/3x2u39n


    Seems to me it's another reason to stay away from Samsung. I've *never*
    had a BD fail to play on my 2-year old Panasonic, with the ORIGINAL
    firmware that came with it. That's right, the old original firmware. I've
    never had a reason to update. Odd that the article mentioned only Samsung
    BD players.
     
    UCLAN, Aug 25, 2010
    #3
  4. whosbest54

    Mike S. Guest

    In article <>,
    Kimba W Lion <> wrote:
    > (Mike S.) wrote:
    >
    >>DVD had the same history. All it took was to buy a player from a company
    >>with a good record of support, with firmware updates of sufficient
    >>frequency to keep up with the new schemes.

    >
    >What firmware updates? What new schemes? I don't recall any DVD player needing
    >updates to play ordinary DVDs.


    Over the years, DVD releases from certain companies (Fox and Disney come
    to mind) have caused problems with some DVD players. IIRC Sony even had
    to reissue some discs because ARccOS caused to many problems.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARccOS_Protection
     
    Mike S., Aug 25, 2010
    #4
  5. whosbest54

    RickMerrill Guest

    Howard Brazee wrote:
    > On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 23:09:14 +0000 (UTC), (Mike S.)
    > wrote:
    >
    >> DVD had the same history. All it took was to buy a player from a company
    >> with a good record of support, with firmware updates of sufficient
    >> frequency to keep up with the new schemes. BD is more complicated, of
    >> course, but the situation is analogous.

    >
    > Early DVD players didn't have Internet connections to upgrade
    > firmware. That's a big advantage now.
    >


    riiight: it lets the companies get the product to market
    before the testing is completed! inevitable i suppose
     
    RickMerrill, Aug 25, 2010
    #5
  6. whosbest54

    Mike S. Guest

    In article <i53isi$nln$-september.org>,
    RickMerrill <> wrote:
    >Howard Brazee wrote:
    >> On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 23:09:14 +0000 (UTC), (Mike S.)
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> DVD had the same history. All it took was to buy a player from a company
    >>> with a good record of support, with firmware updates of sufficient
    >>> frequency to keep up with the new schemes. BD is more complicated, of
    >>> course, but the situation is analogous.

    >>
    >> Early DVD players didn't have Internet connections to upgrade
    >> firmware. That's a big advantage now.
    >>

    >
    >riiight: it lets the companies get the product to market
    >before the testing is completed! inevitable i suppose


    You can't test for compatibility with stuff that doesn't yet exist. Copy
    protection schemes are completely in the hands of the publishers. If they
    create one that "breaks" a player that is already on the market - often
    by deliberately violating previously agreed-upon indistry standards, you
    can't just expect the player manufacturer to have been clairvoyant about
    that and predicted/tested it in advance.


    expect
     
    Mike S., Aug 25, 2010
    #6
  7. whosbest54

    Mike S. Guest

    In article <>,
    UCLAN <> wrote:
    >whosbest54 wrote:
    >
    >> Another reason to hold off on adopting blu-ray. I'm still holding off.
    >>
    >> <http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2010/08/24/24gigaom-copy-protect
    >> ion-makes-dozens-of-blu-ray-titles-un-41787.html?ref=technology>
    >>
    >> or
    >>
    >> http://tinyurl.com/3x2u39n

    >
    >Seems to me it's another reason to stay away from Samsung. I've *never*
    >had a BD fail to play on my 2-year old Panasonic, with the ORIGINAL
    >firmware that came with it. That's right, the old original firmware. I've
    >never had a reason to update. Odd that the article mentioned only Samsung
    >BD players.


    Samsung and LG, in general, have a poor track record with regard to BD
    compatibility with new authoring schemes, and timely firmware updates to
    address the problems. Read any forum dedicated to those brands and you'll
    see the complaints.
     
    Mike S., Aug 25, 2010
    #7
  8. On 8/24/10 PDT 9:09 PM, UCLAN wrote:
    > whosbest54 wrote:
    >
    >> Another reason to hold off on adopting blu-ray. I'm still holding off.
    >>
    >> <http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2010/08/24/24gigaom-copy-protect
    >> ion-makes-dozens-of-blu-ray-titles-un-41787.html?ref=technology>
    >>
    >> or
    >>
    >> http://tinyurl.com/3x2u39n

    >
    > Seems to me it's another reason to stay away from Samsung. I've *never*
    > had a BD fail to play on my 2-year old Panasonic, with the ORIGINAL
    > firmware that came with it. That's right, the old original firmware. I've
    > never had a reason to update. Odd that the article mentioned only Samsung
    > BD players.


    I've no problem with my Samsung....... they probably didn't agree to up
    their ad placements with the NYTimes.....

    It's ironic, perhaps, that the reason there are upgrades for players is
    to allow them to play new content and different formats than were extant
    at the time the players were fabricated. Of course there can and will be
    glitches from untested incompatibilities and new software, not to
    mention botched updates. Is there any indication the article isn't based
    on a small sample??

    -
    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Aug 25, 2010
    #8
  9. whosbest54

    RickMerrill Guest

    Mike S. wrote:
    > In article<i53isi$nln$-september.org>,
    > RickMerrill<> wrote:
    >> Howard Brazee wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 23:09:14 +0000 (UTC), (Mike S.)
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> DVD had the same history. All it took was to buy a player from a company
    >>>> with a good record of support, with firmware updates of sufficient
    >>>> frequency to keep up with the new schemes. BD is more complicated, of
    >>>> course, but the situation is analogous.
    >>>
    >>> Early DVD players didn't have Internet connections to upgrade
    >>> firmware. That's a big advantage now.
    >>>

    >>
    >> riiight: it lets the companies get the product to market
    >> before the testing is completed! inevitable i suppose

    >
    > You can't test for compatibility with stuff that doesn't yet exist. Copy
    > protection schemes are completely in the hands of the publishers. If they
    > create one that "breaks" a player that is already on the market - often
    > by deliberately violating previously agreed-upon indistry standards, you
    > can't just expect the player manufacturer to have been clairvoyant about
    > that and predicted/tested it in advance.
    >
    >
    > expect


    Excellent point - plus there continue to be new codex, interfaces,
    and protocols.
     
    RickMerrill, Aug 25, 2010
    #9
  10. In article <>,
    Mutlley <> wrote:

    >
    > Blu-ray seems to be a moving target as far as the consumer goes. The
    > US movie industry goes off on a tangent again and the end users
    > suffer..


    If you don't play their game, you can't lose.

    There's no suffering in this house.
     
    Elmo P. Shagnasty, Aug 25, 2010
    #10
  11. whosbest54

    whosbest54 Guest

    In article <i51jeq$ok4$>, says...
    >In article <-secrets.com>,
    >whosbest54 <> wrote:


    >>Another reason to hold off on adopting blu-ray. I'm still holding off.

    >
    >DVD had the same history. All it took was to buy a player from a company
    >with a good record of support, with firmware updates of sufficient
    >frequency to keep up with the new schemes. BD is more complicated, of
    >course, but the situation is analogous.
    >

    I was a fairly early DVD adopter and have no recollection of ever seeing
    this issue with it, at least for the discs and players I've used over the
    years.

    Maybe there were some short lived copy protection additions that didn't
    fall into the adopted standards that caused grief for some players, but I
    never saw it.

    And then there were those divx discs and players, but I never bought into
    that either.

    whosbest54
    --
    The flamewars are over...if you want it.

    Unofficial rec.audio.opinion Usenet Group Brief User Guide:
    http://whosbest54.netau.net/rao.htm

    Unofficial rec.music.beatles Usenet Group Brief User Guide:
    http://whosbest54.netau.net/rmb.html
     
    whosbest54, Aug 26, 2010
    #11
  12. whosbest54

    UCLAN Guest

    Doug Jacobs wrote:

    > So far, it seems Blu-Ray has required a firmware upgrade every 4 to 6
    > months - which is a pretty bad track record if you ask me. Especially
    > since flashing firmware is quite a risky thing to do and can easily brick
    > a unit if it goes wrong.


    I'll repeat: Over two years and NO necessary firmware upgrades on
    my Panasonic. It played the "infamous" Avatar BD with no problems.
     
    UCLAN, Aug 26, 2010
    #12
  13. whosbest54

    UCLAN Guest

    Doug Jacobs wrote:

    > This isn't a consumer-friendly practice. Even saying "oh, well, the
    > player can update itself on the internet" isn't going to do folks who
    > don't have broadband internet any good.


    Then simply have the manufacturer send you update CDs when firmware
    updates are issued. Most companies do it at no charge. This is an
    example of making a "mountain out of a mole hill." Move along, folks.
    Or just take your meds...[I suspect that most of the griping is coming
    from left over fans of the HD-DVD format.]
     
    UCLAN, Aug 26, 2010
    #13
  14. whosbest54

    RickMerrill Guest

    Howard Brazee wrote:
    > On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 13:00:23 -0500, Doug Jacobs<>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> You could say the same thing about PC software - especially games.

    >
    > Actually, the OS is a better fit here.
    >
    >> In the past, before the internet was so popular, getting updates required
    >> you to dial into the company's BBS and download them onto floppies.
    >>
    >> Nowadays, the game itself can go to the company's website and download the
    >> patches that inevitably spring up, sometimes just days, after a game is
    >> released.
    >>
    >> Unfortunately this has also led to game companies shipping essentially
    >> beta and even alpha quality code with the mentality of "I'll patch it later."
    >>
    >> What's next? Having one's stove explode because of defective firmware,
    >> only to be told "Well, you should have upgraded your firmware first!"
    >>
    >> Yes, that's why I bought an appliance, because I love having to update it
    >> all the time!

    >
    > So maybe you should have waited to buy your computer until they finish
    > the operating system. Trouble is, the only time an operating system
    > is "finished" is when the maker decides not to fix any more bugs nor
    > offer any improvements because you need to get its next version
    > instead.
    >
    > I'd love to be able to download improvements to my car, my stove, my
    > furnace, and anything else that could benefit by improved technology.
    >


    tHIS IS a good debate! People were so annoyed at MS frequent updates
    that MS usually provides updates on a once-a-month basis.

    The software updates have to be secure, transparent, and NOT require
    power continuity - in other words, if your power fails during an
    update, the appliance just tries again later.

    secure: it would not be good for you-know-who to turn on all our
    stoves at the same time ...

    transparent: updates occur at a time of day when you have never used the thing.
     
    RickMerrill, Aug 26, 2010
    #14
  15. whosbest54

    Les Cargill Guest

    Doug Jacobs wrote:
    > In alt.video.dvd Mutlley<> wrote:
    >> The only problem I remember was some companies added a piece of
    >> crapaware to their DVDs called RCE which I think had something to do
    >> with regional coding and was designed to prevent those suckers
    >> outside R1 from playing cheap Amazon disks. This was about the year
    >> 2000. Most DVD players never had any issues with this crapware.

    >
    > Yes, RCE caused some problems on older players, and then the problems went
    > away - either due to people buying new players, or the companies sending
    > them a version without RCE on it.
    >
    > But that was a single incident in DVD's history.
    >
    > So far, it seems Blu-Ray has required a firmware upgrade every 4 to 6
    > months - which is a pretty bad track record if you ask me. Especially
    > since flashing firmware is quite a risky thing to do and can easily brick
    > a unit if it goes wrong.
    >


    It *SHOULD NOT BE* risky; it just is because it's implemented
    poorly in consumer electronics.

    > Besides, isn't the whole point of having a "Standard" means NO MORE
    > CHANGES? We're on what, Blu-ray release 15 by now?
    >
    >> Blu-ray seems to be a moving target as far as the consumer goes. The
    >> US movie industry goes off on a tangent again and the end users
    >> suffer..

    >


    --
    Les Cargill
     
    Les Cargill, Aug 27, 2010
    #15
  16. whosbest54

    Stewart Guest

    "Doug Jacobs" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In alt.video.dvd Mike S. <> wrote:
    >
    >> You can't test for compatibility with stuff that doesn't yet exist.
    >> Copy
    >> protection schemes are completely in the hands of the publishers.
    >> If they
    >> create one that "breaks" a player that is already on the market -
    >> often
    >> by deliberately violating previously agreed-upon indistry
    >> standards, you
    >> can't just expect the player manufacturer to have been clairvoyant
    >> about
    >> that and predicted/tested it in advance.

    >
    > Again, that's why we call them STANDARDS.
    >
    > If you come out with a blu-ray that doesn't adhere to the blu-ray
    > standard, it's not a blu-ray disc! It may be "blu-ray like" you can
    > call
    > it "enhanced blu-ray" or some garbage like that but if you call it a
    > "blu-ray" then it's perfectly reasonable to assume it's going to
    > play in
    > anything that says it's implemented the blu-ray spec.
    >
    > This isn't a consumer-friendly practice. Even saying "oh, well, the
    > player can update itself on the internet" isn't going to do folks
    > who
    > don't have broadband internet any good.
    >
    >
    > --
    > It's not broken. It's...advanced.


    It seems as if it would be annoying. I prefer to watch a movie when I
    put it in the player, not after downloading and installing upgrades.
    Of course, I haven't had one yet that caused it to happen on my
    PS3.......
     
    Stewart, Aug 28, 2010
    #16
  17. On 8/28/10 PDT 8:44 AM, Kimba W Lion wrote:
    > Jim H<> wrote:
    >
    >> No! A standard does not mean "no more changes". It means that there is a
    >> published set of rules, and if everyone adheres to them, then the
    >> equipment and media should work together. I have read many standards,
    >> but I've never found one that didn't have regular updates. The SCSI
    >> standard is still being updated decades after it was established.

    >
    > But if Blu-Ray wants to achieve mass market acceptance, the manufacturers will
    > have to reach the stage where the players are like appliances: plug it in and
    > it works. Even with tomorrow's Blu-Ray discs.


    What indicates that Blu-Ray hasn't achieved same?

    As to "tomorrow's" disks, it's impossible to program the players to
    anticipate all manner of new twists in the "extras" department.

    --
    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Aug 28, 2010
    #17
  18. In article <i5bbad$p8l$-september.org>,
    John McWilliams <> wrote:

    > > But if Blu-Ray wants to achieve mass market acceptance, the manufacturers
    > > will
    > > have to reach the stage where the players are like appliances: plug it in
    > > and
    > > it works. Even with tomorrow's Blu-Ray discs.

    >
    > What indicates that Blu-Ray hasn't achieved same?


    see below


    > As to "tomorrow's" disks, it's impossible to program the players to
    > anticipate all manner of new twists in the "extras" department.


    Um, that's why you finalize a standard and stick to it.

    Don't make this something like Adobe Acrobat, where you (a) have to have
    it connected to the net or it doesn't work, and (b) spend more time
    updating it than you do using it.

    If it's a consumer appliance, but it doesn't "just work" with all discs
    that are labeled in one single common way, then it's not an appliance.
    It's an overly intrusive game being played by the manufacturers, and in
    the end they get their money only from idiot geeks who have to have "the
    latest and greatest" at any and all cost, and who freak out if they're
    behind even one second on that goal. Like this:

    http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apple


    Frankly, it should be against the law to label the disc a certain way if
    it doesn't play in players that are sold to play discs labeled that way.
     
    Elmo P. Shagnasty, Aug 28, 2010
    #18
  19. On 8/28/10 PDT 9:05 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
    > In article<i5bbad$p8l$-september.org>,
    > John McWilliams<> wrote:
    >
    >>> But if Blu-Ray wants to achieve mass market acceptance, the manufacturers
    >>> will
    >>> have to reach the stage where the players are like appliances: plug it in
    >>> and
    >>> it works. Even with tomorrow's Blu-Ray discs.

    >>
    >> What indicates that Blu-Ray hasn't achieved same?

    >
    > see below
    >
    >
    >> As to "tomorrow's" disks, it's impossible to program the players to
    >> anticipate all manner of new twists in the "extras" department.

    >
    > Um, that's why you finalize a standard and stick to it.
    >
    > Don't make this something like Adobe Acrobat, where you (a) have to have
    > it connected to the net or it doesn't work, and (b) spend more time
    > updating it than you do using it.
    >
    > If it's a consumer appliance, but it doesn't "just work" with all discs
    > that are labeled in one single common way, then it's not an appliance.
    > It's an overly intrusive game being played by the manufacturers, and in
    > the end they get their money only from idiot geeks who have to have "the
    > latest and greatest" at any and all cost, and who freak out if they're
    > behind even one second on that goal. Like this:
    >
    > http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apple
    >
    >
    > Frankly, it should be against the law to label the disc a certain way if
    > it doesn't play in players that are sold to play discs labeled that way.


    I understand you don't like it, and I agree that some mfgs. have screwed
    up. But much of the problem is the producers of disks.

    And you don't indicate any figures that show that BD players haven't
    achieved mass market acceptance- your non-acceptance to be sure, but not
    the market's.

    --
    john mcwilliams
     
    John McWilliams, Aug 28, 2010
    #19
  20. whosbest54

    UCLAN Guest

    Stewart wrote:

    > It seems as if it would be annoying. I prefer to watch a movie when I
    > put it in the player, not after downloading and installing upgrades.


    Most newer BD players have Ethernet connections and check for updates
    automatically as soon as you power them up, or however you want based
    on how you set up that feature.
     
    UCLAN, Aug 28, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Alpha

    Blu Ray and Copy Protection

    Alpha, Aug 9, 2005, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    62
    Views:
    1,496
    Tarkus
    Aug 22, 2005
  2. rishil
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    586
    MassiveProng
    Jan 27, 2007
  3. Barbara
    Replies:
    55
    Views:
    1,328
    def456
    Mar 9, 2007
  4. Telstar
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    666
    Geena Phillips
    Apr 13, 2007
  5. Blig Merk
    Replies:
    66
    Views:
    1,957
    StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt
    Apr 27, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page