Just to be clear, the
FCC rules
don't prohibit movie studios from releasing movies to cable networks for viewing in advance of DVD release. The rules prohibit selectable output controls, a measure intended to help prevent piracy of a new release, piracy that would utterly decimate the DVD sales and rental market. This change would effectively close the so-called "analog loophole" which essentially is a back-door pirates can use to violate copyrights. It would provide a means of allowing distributors to offer a video presentation (such as of a newly-released film) with playback limited to
HDMI outputs only. The component video outputs (which are the source of the "analog loophole") would be disabled during playback of that specifically tagged video presentation.
The video content belongs to the copyright holder. No one disputes that, actually. It is their right to withhold the content, utterly, until the DVD release. No one disputes that, either. And that's exactly what they're doing. What this action is, essentially, is an offer by the content owners to offer us folks who prefer watching video productions in the comfort of our own homes the ability to do so when the video presentation is first released, rather than forcing us to wait perhaps a year or so. So the choice, for us, for regulators, etc., is between [1] being offered
nothing (as is the case now), and [2] being offered something with selectable output control enabled, limiting playback to
HDMI.
My position on this is clear. It seems obvious to me that being offered
something is better than being offered
nothing. I, specifically,
want to watch new releases at home. If that means that I can't pirate what I watch, well, gosh I don't care because I wouldn't pirate the video anyway.
So who loses if selectable output controls is permitted?
First, and foremost, pirates lose. [SARCASM]My heart goes out to them.[/SARCASM]
Other than pirates, movie houses may lose a little. They're not losing me. I'll wait the year if I have to, to avoid all the unpleasant bits of the movie-going experience that they offer me. However, there will be some folks who would rather watch a movie sitting around their own living room with friends and family, drinking beer that they paid a reasonable price for, instead of sitting in room full of strangers, drinking watered-down soft drinks that they paid a mint for. That's not to say that I don't feel for movie houses -- and that's not sarcasm. It is a terrible business to be in, given how much better the home viewing experience has become over the years. This is yet-another nail in the coffin of the non-IMAX movie-going experience. It is important to note, however, that movie houses are explicitly
not within the purview of the
FCC. The
FCC is supposed to protect television viewers, television broadcasters and their owners, and multi-channel service operators and their owners. Not movie houses.
Companies that burn DVDs will suffer a little, as will Netflix and Blockbuster. However, they're (currently) also outside the purview of the
FCC.
Who doesn't lose (but will claim to)? People who want to time-shift as they see fit. Surely selectable output controls will prevent them from doing what they want to do with these video presentations, but remember the alternative that they're experiencing now: They can't time-shift what they aren't even receiving. However, do expect to see a lot of people hemming and hawing about how they're going to "lose control" over what they can do with the video presentations that they "own". Understand all that for what it is, a ridiculous set of self-serving distortions of reality. The key fact is that they're being offered
nothing now, so they can do even less now than they will be able to do once selectable output controls are permitted.
HD Movies coming to a Cable before DVD release
Linear Mode
