3 ms·

After Apple strong armed the record labels into giving up DRM, the content providers would not be crazy to do their utmost to sabotage an Apple play for ownersh

After Apple strong armed the record labels into giving up DRM, the content providers would not be crazy to do their utmost to sabotage an Apple play for ownership of the living room. Imagine the money to be made when you can exclusively license major releases to specific brands of equipment in specific countries. The mechanism is there in HDMI to say "this Blu-Ray only works on Samsung TVs that are less than 6 months old." Imagine what Samsung would pay a studio for that! The mechanism is there to use computer vision to make sure you are actually watching ads. The networks must be salivating. Every copyright owner wants their own subscription service and player and geographical exclusive deals. Apple would serve its customers, the consumers. The MPAA's members know that. Apple TV may be allowed to exist now, but not for long.

thirdsun 11y ago
> The mechanism is there in HDMI to say "this Blu-Ray only works on Samsung TVs that are less than 6 months old." Imagine what Samsung would pay a studio for that! Imagine what I and probably several other potential viewers would pay for that. Not a cent. The current movie and film situation already is pretty bad, unlike music which I can buy anywhere without DRM. I happily pay for things I enjoy and usually buy 10-20 albums monthly + streaming for preview purposes. With movies these days, I mostly can't buy them. Furthermore I don't see how the end of DRM has been any problem for the music industry. If they made a mistake it was probably the shift to streaming.