MovieSwap -- interesting new Kickstarter

[Homerboy]

They are most certainly inferring they are housing all the DVD's "somewhere"

And what is odd is they say they will provide you with a DVD as some sort of "key" to get you in on the program. So they must think that by you providing a DVD to the "pool" they have, then you're in on the first right doctrine/fair use angle.

But as I stated earlier, to me this seems like they are pushing it to the limits...

Edit:

I don't get the "register them on behalf of their owners" part at all. Register where?
"Putting them in the cloud" <shudder> certainly implies to me they plan on ripping.

 

[poofyhairguy]

It is Aereo all over again. New and fresh technical loopholes around archaic laws aren't welcome in this industry.

 

[Oceanas]

IF they are streaming from a physical copy, it might be interesting to see how that is seen legally. It comes down to how they see the difference between lending a DVD to your neighbor (solid legally) vs. letting a neighbor control the DVD in your player (is this the MovieSwap model?).

It's not very clear with the info they put online, but it does say you have to "swap" a DVD with another member to watch a movie that isn't in your library. So it seems like they are saying you "swap" ownership of the DVDs when you want to watch a movie. So you "give ownership" of whatever movie you have to another member and they give you ownership of whatever movie of theirs you want to watch. Hence why they say they register the ownership of the DVDs.

Yeah, I can't tell if ripping or physical or what. If streaming a physical disk, it would be interesting, if ripping there's no way it holds up. And if physical... how? They'd need a drive for EVERY disk, and I think a case could be made that each person's individual copy would have to be shared -- not 1 copy shared to multiple people at the same time.

What they said in the KS comments, was they can only stream a movie to as many people as they have copies of the movie in their system. Which would tie back into the swapping of ownership thing. Not that I think it all makes sense.

 

[kranky]

OK I think I get it now. MS holds the physical DVDs provided by customers, and registers ownership in each customer's name. Then to watch a DVD you have MS swap ownership with someone else. Now you own it and can watch it. And I guess if you "own" a DVD, you are allowed to rip it for your personal viewing (or is that a DMCA violation?) and that's why they think it's OK to put it in the cloud.

 

[Fenixgoon]

I'm no expert, but I don't see how this is legal in the slightest.

yep.

if the lawsuits don't come up prior to the project starting, they sure as hell will after.

 

[TwiceOver]

basically. can I invest in their lawyers?

This. They are building a war chest that will go entirely to waste.

 

[Aikouka]

It is Aereo all over again. New and fresh technical loopholes around archaic laws aren't welcome in this industry.

Aereo was the first thing that came to my mind. Aereo tried to skirt around the requirement to pay for retransmission via renting out a small antenna that would be dynamically assigned. I forget what exactly got them in the end, but there was sort of a "gotcha" in their design that they couldn't come up with a good defense for.

Although, there's a simpler way to take this down: public performance. All home media is strictly licensed for private consumption. The MPAA simply has to argue that streaming the source material from one location (the "home") to another constitutes a public broadcast/performance.

 

[sdifox]

I think they're going for the angle of how libraries rent videos out for free. My local library has a huge stock of Bluray movies that you can check out at any time for free. Only this is digital. Guarantee you it's not going to fly legally long-term

Libraries pay through their noses for content. It's not like they go to BB and pick up a copy, they have to get the authorised to be used in library ones. Exact same item, costing at least ten times more.

 

[sdifox]

ripping netflix disks is the fastest and cheapest way for people to grow a big library. lol if you think people dont do it.

... you kind of have to pay for netflix. torrent the movie is the fastest and cheapest way. Keep up with reality will ya?

 

[sdifox]

OK I think I get it now. MS holds the physical DVDs provided by customers, and registers ownership in each customer's name. Then to watch a DVD you have MS swap ownership with someone else. Now you own it and can watch it. And I guess if you "own" a DVD, you are allowed to rip it for your personal viewing (or is that a DMCA violation?) and that's why they think it's OK to put it in the cloud.

So the Car Key Club of the internet age?

 

[Aikouka]

Libraries pay through their noses for content. It's not like they go to BB and pick up a copy, they have to get the authorised to be used in library ones. Exact same item, costing at least ten times more.

Yeah, it has been like this since the days of VHS. I recall my uncle (he ran a hobby shop that also rented movies and games) telling me how the tapes cost about $100 each compared to the ~$20 for a normal VHS. I recently stumbled across The Gaming Historian on YouTube, and he has an interesting video that touches on rentals and such.

 

[purbeast0]

Yeah, it has been like this since the days of VHS. I recall my uncle (he ran a hobby shop that also rented movies and games) telling me how the tapes cost about $100 each compared to the ~$20 for a normal VHS. I recently stumbled across The Gaming Historian on YouTube, and he has an interesting video that touches on rentals and such.

back in the day with VHS tapes were different though. they didn't make all VHS tapes to be for retail sales in stores like they do with DVDs.

i only know this because my mom used to date a guy who ran a video rental store. i would get movies through him sometimes and i remember movies like jurassic park were like $20, but when i asked him to get me mortal kombat, it was $100. and MK wasn't a movie you could go into circuit city and buy off the shelf, but jurassic park was. MK wasn't mass produced for the general public while JP was.

now a days, every single dvd/bluray is made for purchase. back then it just wasn't the case with VHS.

 

[drebo]

Why couldn't they just program a Roku channel? Why do we need yet another piece of crap remote and HDMI dongle?

 

[SearchMaster]

OK I think I get it now. MS holds the physical DVDs provided by customers, and registers ownership in each customer's name. Then to watch a DVD you have MS swap ownership with someone else. Now you own it and can watch it. And I guess if you "own" a DVD, you are allowed to rip it for your personal viewing (or is that a DMCA violation?) and that's why they think it's OK to put it in the cloud.

My understanding is that you are NOT allowed to rip for personal viewing under DMCA if there is any sort of copy protection that must be circumvented, but the MPAA has graciously decided not to go after people for it (yet).

Theoretically, what they are proposing to do sounds like it might be legal (other than the DMCA/ripping aspect, which would kill the whole thing) as proposed, but the question is who has more money for legal fees - MS or MPAA - and can they raise enough money for a protracted legal fight (very unlikely)?

 

[JSt0rm]

they have to circumvent the protection to stream it online. Even if its coming off the disk. Basically these guys are idiots for dropping some money into this "idea"

 

[JSt0rm]

they would have to rip the dvd. And even then its sd quality. Nobody wants that.