October 20th, 2005
Back to the Red Envelopes: Netflix Shelves Movie Download Service
By This summer we wrote that mail order movie rental company Netflix Inc. was planning a download rental service. This had us salivating, because for many people, even the one or two day wait is annoying, and using the mail seems soooo last century (although it sure beats driving to a store.) Today we learned that the studios basically slammed the door in Netflix’s face, ending the download plans for now. We Predict: In the words of “Ah-nold,” they’ll be back.
Netflix Inc. will postpone a test launch of its online movie download service indefinitely because of problems obtaining licensing agreements from Hollywood studios, Chief Executive Reed Hastings told analysts on a conference call on Wednesday. Hastings said the company would continue enhancing its infrastructure and developing technology to deliver online movies so the service “will be ready to launch when the content climate begins to thaw.” Source: Reuters
Before you go…..
–New Skype Toolbar Extension for FireFox
–WordPress 2.0 Available for Download Today
–Are Tech Pundits Biased Against PCs?
–Honda’s Automatic Transmission Motorcycle
Technorati Tags : Netflix, downloads, DRM, Blockbuster, movies, RealTechNews, Alice_Hill, Movielink
Dave says:
I would definitely be all for downloading movies, but I haven’t a clue how they’d be able to control the security of the video stream. Obviously, PC-based media players have security features, but I’m not so much interested in watching “Star Wars III” on my PC as streaming it to my $25K home theatre.
October 20th, 2005 at 1:30 pm
Alice says:
That’s key. There are devices to bridge that gap, but getting the downloads in was what I was hoping Netflix would do.
October 20th, 2005 at 1:34 pm
Ron Burgundy? says:
“my $25K home theatre.”
Didn’t realize we were having a pissing contest.
October 20th, 2005 at 2:19 pm
eviljimbo says:
i have a $50.00 used 36″ toshiba i wouldnt mind watching starwars on (just my 2 squirts of piss, since were having a contest)
October 20th, 2005 at 2:24 pm
The Kamakazi Cow says:
“my 25K home theatre.”
Yeah… did daddy buy that for you along with your yacht and your fancy ketchup???
October 20th, 2005 at 2:27 pm
Ron Guatemala says:
oh yeah!? Well I have a 1 bazillion dollar, solid diamond entertainment system.
HA
October 20th, 2005 at 2:32 pm
Damn Dan says:
My home theater system was bought for $20K (and change), but it was bought 25% off. Guess that means mine beats your’s by a full 8%.
/I don’t go for those ghetto $25K systems
October 20th, 2005 at 2:46 pm
Farker says:
Gotta love it when braggerts like the first poster get pwn’ed by both the average AND more affluent HTS owners!
/snarf
October 20th, 2005 at 2:49 pm
Keith says:
So this means that America has to keep downloading movies illegally?
October 20th, 2005 at 2:50 pm
Angus says:
Oh you want us to stand around and fap over you”25K home theatre?” What. A. Dick.
October 20th, 2005 at 2:50 pm
Scrappy says:
I never could understand why Hollywood would is complaining so much about DVD copying. Y, do people rent movies? “So they don’t have to buy them.” Y, do people copy movies? “So they don’t have to buy them”. What’s the difference between renting and copying? Hollywood is still not seeing the extra sales. In theory; Blockbuster/Netflix buys 10,000 copies/licenses of “The Rock”. Over the course of the year 50,000 people rent “The Rock”, does Hollywood see any extra sales? No. Y? After 50,000 people have rented “The Rock” Blockbuster/Netflix sell a portion their copy for $7-10. Joe user now owns a copy but Blockbuster/Netflix got some of their money back, not Hollywood. So what’s the difference in Blockbuster/Netflix buying 10,000 licenses for download? The downloading could be limited to 10,000. At that point Blockbuster/Netflix would have to buy more licenses if needed. 50,000 people are still going to see it, thanks users with DVD burners. People will still end up with copies, just like they would actually renting the disc. Hollywood still gets no extra sales. The only thing that changes is Blockbuster/Netflix looses used DVD sales. But that is made up by not having to pay postage/shipping expenses. True, Hollywood would gain nothing. I think Hollywood is just trying to make up for lack of creative ideas for new movies, and lost money on really bad remakes of older movies. Then again, who cares, Hollywood has more money than anyone, except for Bill Gates.
October 20th, 2005 at 2:53 pm
sumyungai says:
Why does this thread look more and more like “fark.com” and not tech news? Get real.
/dude, you are teh n00b.
October 20th, 2005 at 2:55 pm
jason says:
my $25K home theatre
http://omgzitsarnold.ytmnd.com/
October 20th, 2005 at 3:11 pm
Waldo Pepper says:
I have an $8 theater…I buy a ticket and I get a huge screen and awesome sound.
October 20th, 2005 at 3:20 pm
Gonzee says:
You wish this was as cool as Fark.com.
October 20th, 2005 at 3:26 pm
Karmacidal says:
I know Fark.com; This is no Fark.com.
October 20th, 2005 at 4:14 pm
Fark Worker Bee says:
I work for fark.com,
So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies…
October 20th, 2005 at 4:28 pm
MI-5 says:
THe comments here should go to the Fark forum on this topic. Mr. “25K home theatre system” is getting blasted relentlessly.
October 20th, 2005 at 4:48 pm
Alice says:
Ok. Back to the topic. Here’s what I don’t get. Most tech saavy people use netflix to quickly rip and copy DVDs and mail them back, so wouldn’t the film industry actually be more interested in legal downloads in the long run?
October 20th, 2005 at 4:50 pm
Michael Timmons says:
Do a search on Yahoo for Sandisk TrustedFlash. This is a new technology that will allow secure downloads to a secure flash memory card. This is the only technology I am aware of that is designed for this
October 20th, 2005 at 4:55 pm
V. I. Lenin says:
Sounds like a bunch of jealous, knee-jerking nitwits to me. The guy with the $25K system was using the figure to illustrate his point; i.e., any DRM-encumbered rental system that limits the content to a PC in the basement is worthless to a large portion of its potential customer base.
October 20th, 2005 at 4:57 pm
Michael Timmons says:
There is no way they would let you download a movie that would ONLY play on a PC. You use a secure flash card (Sandisk TrustedFlash), that is secure because it can’t be copied.
October 20th, 2005 at 5:02 pm
Private Rod says:
DVI-D carries video signals encoded digitally. Fibre-optic cable carries audio signals encoded digitally, in beautiful DTS 6.1 surround sound, if the originally feed contains the encoding. There are already boxes on the market which take both feeds, time-align them, and re-encode them as MPEG’s or burn them straight to DVD. Do a google search if you don’t believe me.
And now that there are gazillions of high-def TV’s carrying those inputs, there will never be a secure digital format. It doesn’t matter how tight the encryption is between Netflix and your $25,000 home-theatre PC. There’s a clear signal that’s (supposed to be) fed into your TV. And THAT’s why there will never a Netflix movie download service.
October 20th, 2005 at 6:46 pm
DaWhoLaGN says:
Where did you get that $25k home theater system; the toilet store?
October 20th, 2005 at 6:56 pm
Netflix sucks says:
Netflix sucks.
October 20th, 2005 at 7:12 pm
ed3 says:
Weren’t NetFlix and TiVo supposed to get together?? I can understand the studios having issues with downloads to hard-to-control PCs, but what about a controlled endpoint such as a broadband enabled TiVo device??
October 20th, 2005 at 8:02 pm
Ron Jeremy says:
I use Netflix to rip dvd’s and download movies as well. I also have entensive dvd collection that was purchased. The movie industry will one day have to come to the ralization that you can’t give something to someone, without giving it to them. I still buy dvd’s and people will always pay for dvd’s and movies. They need to relax….
October 21st, 2005 at 6:28 am
Stephen says:
I really don’t mind the wait through the mail. I’m on the 3 movie plan and I sometimes have a movie for a month or more before I can get around to watching it. I like to laugh at those poor souls who bash Netflix cause they’re on the 8 flicks at a time plan and like to receive, rip and return as fast as they can but NetFlix slows things up once in awhile. These guys remind me of hamsters on the wheel. Does anybody actually watch any of the movies they’re spenind hours ripping or downloading? or is the purpose just instant gratification in being able to watch a movie immediately.
I have 101 movies in my queue. At 6 or so a month, I have about a year and half of flicks stacked up.
October 24th, 2005 at 1:18 pm
a8b13646f611 says:
a8b13646f611…
a8b13646f611114b07b5…
May 10th, 2008 at 11:50 pm