Originally posted by FredBun:

---

I know we can go on and on about this, just for the sake of a friendly argument, and I've done this before as strange as it might seem, I'm no techie far from it, but like I said I deal with what I hear and see in the trenches, that after 3 years time if we still have a forum like this, I will love to re-visit this conversation.

---

Originally posted by varnull:

---

Odd then how I can go down my local high street and buy a newly manufactured VHS machine, considering those were "phased out" 5 years ago.

---

Originally posted by garmoon:

---

There are 2 BluRay shelves at my Blockbuster. And hundreds of DVD shelves. When that ratio changes then they maybe will stop making DVDs but that is far into the future. I agree with FredBun change to DVD from VHS monumental. DVD to BluRay not so great. Hell, half the country or more, hasn't even got an HD TV to play one on! LOL

---

Originally posted by garmoon:

---

@zippyDSM

I'll believe $500 HD 30-40" when I see them but I don't believe they will ever be that cheap.

---

Originally posted by ematrix:

---

I agree with garmoon and FredBun, no point repeating it.

It's absurd that by 2011 40" screens will cost under US$500, it simply won't happen, we could hope that but it won't be... yes, there are screens that are cheaper that others, but what's the point in investing on them, if they provide a crappy picture worthy of a VHS or VCD movie?... there's a reason why they are cheaper.

The reason why prices for BR movies are trying to stay under US$20-30, and that within USA, is because otherwise people wouldn't be buying them. If Blu-ray was indeed gaining popularity and acceptance among consumers, as they keep insisting on their corporate propaganda, patronized articles, sponsored analysis and predictions, then there will be no needed to lower their prices.

Also that's why they still charge US$15-25 for new releases on DVD, because DVD is very popular and accepted by consumers, and they have no need to sell them cheaper. I could walk into any store that sells or rents movies, and at most they will have 50 BD discs availible, but they will have thousands of DVD discs for sale or rent.

Finally the world is lightyears away from accepting Blu-ray, and if BD is not being widely accepted within USA, and it's mainly rejected by the rest of the world, then the format is doomed to became the LD of the 21st century. In the other hand DVD is well established and very popular among consumers worldwide, it's the VHS of the 21st century, and it's going to take a new revolutionaty format to displace it, but Blu-ray is not such format.

---

Originally posted by zippyDSM:

---

30-40 inchers are going for 800-2K in 3 years the bottom bands will hit 500 in 5 years most brands will be in the 500-1200 mark, and under 30 will be 300 or less.

In 5 years there's a 70%+ chance the market will be right for BR to take over for DVD, assuming BR expands its market "some" by 010-011, in 2 years time if BR has not tripled its market by then it will take to it to the mid or alter half of the 01X decade for BR to replace DVD.

What I am getting at price more than anything will help BR grow, if its cheap BR will grow well but its not going to be cheap enough to start for another 2 years.

---

Quote:

---

The Motion Picture Association of America took its crusade for selectable output control (SOC) to the next level on Thursday, responding to critics in the FCC's proceeding on the matter. The MPAA's July 31 filing takes particular exception to suggestions that the agency lift its prohibition on SOC on a two-year trial basis, and makes it clear that the group won't take kindly to other limitations, either. If consumers want to see movies on TV earlier than they appear on DVD, the MPAA says, they had better be willing to allow movie studios to remotely shut down some cable box outputs.
No trial period

In early June the FCC granted the MPAA a proceeding on its waiver request. SOC lets video distributors close down analog outputs on broadcasts to block the so-called "analog hole" that MPAA fears can be easily accessed by movie pirates. This security will, in turn, encourage Hollywood studios to partner with cable companies and release early-run studio films to TV, with the guarantee that the movies will pass only over protected digital links such as those that use HDCP.

"The Petitioners' theatrical movies are too valuable in this early distribution window to risk their exposure to unauthorized copying," MPAA wrote to the FCC. "Distribution over insecure outputs would facilitate the illegal copying and redistribution of this high value content, causing untold damage to the DVD and other 'downstream' markets."

Now MPAA also warns that a "calendar-based restriction" on SOC would be impractical, "and fail to provide the regulatory certainty" that movie studios will need to negotiate with cable companies for the fast transfer of early run movies to TV.
Vague hysteria

Ars construed from this language the possibility that MPAA wants SOC in order to limit the future ability of consumers to copy or record early run movies when they appear on TV. I even had at it with several representatives of the trade association in a recent interview, which, not surprisingly, drew different reactions across the blogosphere.

"What the MPAA is clearly trying to do here is start releasing movies on TV before they're available on DVD," declared Techdirt's Mike Masnick in a commentary on the exchange, "but wants to do so in a way that users won't be able to record on their DVRs (though, they hardly come out and say that)."

On the other hand, Content Agenda's Paul Sweeting takes me to task for making the MPAA come off as "vaguely hysterical (or worse)." Sweeting points out that at present it's pretty difficult to make permanent copies of VOD/PPV fare. He predicts that the early HD VOD offerings that the studios would like to release will similarly come with 'copy-never' or 'display only' flags.

"The use of SOC by the studios would not deny consumers a right they presumptively have, or a capability they currently enjoy," Sweeting concludes. "The issue for the studios is whether unprotected outputs could be used to record the early-release content in ways that are not currently permitted and then use that recording as the source for additional unauthorized copies."
Uncheck our authority

MPAA's latest filing does not focus on this debate, but on the conditions that various commenters have proposed for the waiver. The trade group wrangles with two parties that express concern that the cable companies not be allowed to use SOC in an unsupervised fashion, these being The Digital Transition Licensing Administrator (DTLA) and TiVo.

DTLA helps coordinate digital copy protection standards for the so-called "5C" manufacturing group (Toshiba, Intel, Matsushita, Sony, and Hitachi). It is skeptical of the plan and warns that SOC "cannot be left to the unfettered discretion of content owners and MVPDs [cable companies]. Such unchecked authority places far too much power in the hands of content owners, to the potential detriment of all other equally-important stakeholders."

DVR maker TiVo extends this argument to propose specific limits on the waiver. The company writes that whatever new service comes out of MPAA's proposal, it should not be able to disable any protected digital outputs approved by CableLabs, the cable industry's R&D group. "Consumer electronics manufacturers such as TiVo have made significant investments and brought innovative devices to market in reliance on the standards created by CableLabs," TiVo suggests.

MPAA says that there is "no demonstrated public interest need" for this. "For the new business model the Waiver would make possible, Petitioners and MVPDs should have the flexibility to use the technologies that are best suited to serve the needs of their mutual customers, while balancing the need to protect their content," the trade association writes.

TiVo also asks that if the MPAA receives its SOC waiver, it be limited to a 120-day period "between theatrical release and home media release." No again, MPAA insists, arguing that different movies have different release patterns, based on their popularity. "There is no compelling need to establish an arbitrary, fixed window for the proposed new Services," MPAA writes. "In fact, there are compelling marketplace statistics that demonstrate such a regulatory limitation is unnecessary."
Down the analog hole

The MPAA's filing also responds to the comments of Public Knowledge and seven other organizations. PK's filing expressed skepticism that the "analog hole" problem really requires this waiver.

"Evidence which the MPAA has relied on in the past to demonstrate the dangers of the 'analog hole' is unreliable and inapposite," the groups charge. "In the complete absence of evidence, there is no reason to believe that additional, costly, restrictive technologies are needed."

MPAA answers, in so many words, that the fears of its own member studios make the need for the waiver self-evident. "The fact that almost no movies are made available to MVPDs pre-DVD release is clear and convincing evidence that the analog hole is an impediment to the early window release of high-value content," the MPAA concludes. The association has pressed its Petition for Expedited Special Relief on behalf of Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox, Universal City Studios Walt Disney Studios, and Warner Brothers.

---

Originally posted by ematrix:

---

Zippy, you contradict yourself... first you said that in 5 years time, 1080p TV screens will be about US$5-6 an inch, therefore you're saying that a 40" screen will cost under US$300, and I'm having a hard time believing that will actually happen, even in 5 years... hell, even now that are becaming obsolete, 27" and larger CRT TVs are sold above US$300.

Now you're saying that only screens under 30" will sell for US$300 or less, but 30" to 40" screens will sell at US$500-1200... now that's more realistic, yet i doubt a real name brand (Sony, Samsung, Pioneer, Panasonic) will ever sell a 1080p 40" screen at US$500-600, even in 5 years... most likely will be priced for around US$800.

You have to consider also that the prices we are talking about, are for consumers within USA, but people in the rest of the world have always paid almost twice for the same stuff. For instance, a 40" screen that is sold for US$1200 in USA, is currently sold for US$2000 in other countries.

If you add up that also Blu-ray players and movies, are sold in other countries at much more expensive prices than in USA, then consider that if a lot of people in USA think that isn't worth spending money in equipment so they could view BD movies, the scenario is even worse for people in the rest of the world.

Maybe in 5 years the USA market will be adecuate for Blu-ray, when most US homes will have a HDTV set, and if a new revolutionary format doesn't arrise by then; but that will not be the case for the rest of the world, and not to the extend to take over DVD, specially globally, because it's lightyears from achieving worldwide acceptance, popularity and consumption.

I really doubt that Blu-ray will triple its US market in 2 years, but even if Blu-ray expands its market within USA, it won't make any difference if it keeps beign ignored and rejected by the global population, and it will be doomed to a niche market for a few countries in the world.

PS: Movie studios will not release titles on BD exclusively, they need the income and profit from billions of DVDs sold globally, and it will be suicidal to do the contrary.

---