Keychest - The Anti-DVD

[Moonliner]

Keychest (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748703816204574485650026945222.html)

Walt Disney Co. is close to unveiling technology that it says will enable entertainment companies to adapt their business models to a new reality in which consumers increasingly rely on computers and cell phones in place of DVD players and TVs.

The technology, code-named Keychest, could contribute to a shift in what it means for a consumer to own a movie or a TV show, by redefining ownership as access rights, not physical possession.



I'll have to think this one through before I decide if it's a good thing or not.

[Alex]

It certainly is for me. It has been a bit of a surprise to me, but it turns out that with a few exceptions I don't really care if I own media.

I don't care about DRM. I don't care if in four years I lose access that I purchase today (because experience shows I will very rarely actually view the media I've purchased more than once).

And by leasing access to digital media I don't actually end up with unused crap in my house.

[innerSpaceman]

Yeah, um, I can tell you right now, I will NOT be watching Lawrence of Arabia on my cellphone.

[Chernabog]

I hear cell phone porn sucks too.

[lashbear]

On the other hand, I regularly watch media I've purchased years ago... and have hunted down most of the hard-to-get ones on DVD (ie: Carny with Jodie Foster)

I think I'm a sentimentalist. No, really !!

[Moonliner]

Yeah, um, I can tell you right now, I will NOT be watching Lawrence of Arabia on my cellphone.

Which I think is a plus.

In theory purchasing the "access rights" you can watch it on any device you like anytime you like. So you can watch Lawrence on the big screen HDTV if you like, on your PC, or in a few years on your direct neural input helmet.

If along with the "access rights" you also get the physical media of the day (blu-ray, dvd, whatever) then I think this is a winner. If all I get is a key code I'm less enthused.

[flippyshark]

There are plenty of titles I am really happy I have permanent copies of, especially Disney films. Given the way the mouse re-edits, re-colors, even bowdlerizes, I'd hate to leave their legacy entirely in their hands.

And you never know when your favorite movie will become the subject of some legal disagreement, and suddenly, there's no access anymore.

That said, I mostly rent these days, especially titles younger than twenty years or so.

[flippyshark]

On the other hand, I regularly watch media I've purchased years ago... and have hunted down most of the hard-to-get ones on DVD (ie: Carny with Jodie Foster)

Where, oh where did you find Carny?

(Holds his breath waiting for Wilson Phillips joke.)

[lashbear]

Where, oh where did you find Carny?

(Holds his breath waiting for Wilson Phillips joke.)
I don't know who Wilson Phillips is or even that Carnie Wilson had a talk show ( :p ) but you can get Carny on DVD here (http://www.amazon.com/Carny-Gary-Busey/dp/B002KAKF0S/ref=pd_cp_d_3)


:cheers:

[Pirate Bill]

In theory purchasing the "access rights" you can watch it on any device you like anytime you like. So you can watch Lawrence on the big screen HDTV if you like, on your PC, or in a few years on your direct neural input helmet.

I doubt it would be one payment for access rights on all devices...present or future. Each separate device will require a separate payment. It's pretty much the same thing now (if you bought it on DVD but want it on Blu-ray, that's another purchase), but you won't get to own the media.

I'm very much against the pay-per-view model. It's fine as an entertainment supplement, but I don't want it as our only option. For reasons already given above (sentimental, archival, etc.) I like to have a physical copy of my favorites.

[Moonliner]

I doubt it would be one payment for access rights on all devices...present or future. Each separate device will require a separate payment. It's pretty much the same thing now (if you bought it on DVD but want it on Blu-ray, that's another purchase), but you won't get to own the media.

The article seems fairly clear on that point:


The technology would allow consumers to pay a single price for permanent access to a movie or TV show across multiple digital platforms and devices—from the Web, to mobile gadgets like iPhones and cable services that allow on-demand viewing. It could also facilitate other services such as online movie subscriptions

[CoasterMatt]

Whenever the content supplier come out with a new technology, they always hype and spin it to sound like a wonderful FREE thing, and how you'll be able to do all sorts of things, then the accounting side kicks in, and suddenly features start disappearing and things go to hell. Anybody remember the DIVX disc? Or Buena Vista Home Video's own version of Flexplay called the eZ-D?

[Pirate Bill]

The article seems fairly clear on that point:

Bah! I'm supposed to actually read the article? This is the interwebs, we don't do that here.

So let's suppose they do give you "permanent access" rights. Then it becomes another cloud computing problem. What happens when the cloud isn't available?

And what about the bandwidth problem? Each time you want to watch a movie it needs to be streamed or downloaded. In a time where ISPs are talking (and implementing) download caps, this isn't good.

It just seems like, in the end, there will be less control for the consumer on how and when they consume their entertainment.

[Pirate Bill]

Oh, and also from the article:
And Keychest would allow movie studios to dictate how many devices, connected to which distribution networks, a given title can be played on. That could limit consumer choice and make the system confusing.
As tight-assed as many of the movie studios are (including Disney), this is sure to be used as aggressively as possible.