Sony goes DivX - now what about e-books, Sony?

[Alexander Turcic]

Sony's Pictures Television division knocked us dead today by announcing that their online retailers will soon be able to offer Sony content in DivX format. You know, not until recently DivX was considered the rebel codec (ab)used by licentious pirates for swapping Hollywood movies over P2P networks. But before you're jumping up and down in joy, also consider this:

She [a spokesperson for DivX] also said that all titles would be download-to-own, but that there will be some type of unspecified DRM. Tracking down those DivX Sony movies might be a challenge, though. "We have no announcements with retailers at this time," she told us.

Here we have it again. DivX yes, but afflicted by DRM disease. I understand that there are (perhaps outdated) business models requiring the technical means to prevent people from copying content; however, I pray that Sony will not fall into the trap of introducing yet another DRM mechanism that would require "compatible" players. Or maybe they are eyeing the official DivX DRM. While it might have the power to gain a wider acceptance (with the sale of more DivX-certified devices), I would feel naturally uneasy about using a tool that was co-developed by the MPAA.

Coming back to the question that I raised at the beginning. What are the chances that Sony's e-book devision will switch from their proprietary LRF e-book format to something more open, like, let's say, Adobe ePub? We've heard it many times before that a Sony Reader future upgrade might deliver ePub support, but this doesn't necessarily imply that Sony will abandon LRF as its preferred format for selling e-book. Or does it?

Related Business Week article: Sony BMG Plans to Drop DRM

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Alexander Turcic

Coming back to the question that I raised at the beginning. What are the chances that Sony's e-book devision will switch from their proprietary LRF e-book format to something more open, like, let's say, Adobe ePub? [/url][/i]

ePub is just as "proprietory" a format as LRF. Abobe own it. "Proprietory" simply means that somebody owns it; it has nothing to do with whether or not it's an "open" or "closed" standard.

[Hadrien]

Originally Posted by HarryT

ePub is just as "proprietory" a format as LRF. Abobe own it. "Proprietory" simply means that somebody owns it; it has nothing to do with whether or not it's an "open" or "closed" standard.

Not it's not: http://www.idpf.org/

No one "owns it".

[HarryT]

Then why is it called "Adobe ePub"?

[davidrothman]

Hadrien is right. No one's as gung ho about a standard nonproprietary e-book format as I am--this is one of the main themes of the TeleRead Web log--but the IDPF spec is actually the product of a number of people and companies. We need to monitor the IDPF for excessive influence by Adobe and other corporations. But the actual .epub format is indeed nonprorprietary.

The evil in Digital Editions is (1) use of proprietary DRM and (2) the heavily promoted use of DRM, period. The IDPF hopes to address such issues by way of interoperable DRM, an effort I actually support since anything's better than the present mess. But the real solution is NO DRM or least nothing more than "social DRM" (owner-identifying info in files---flawed but again better than what we have).

Meanwhile proprietary DRM means that even with capabilities for standard .epub, DE is still an eBabel offender, at least in regard to "protected" books. But proprietary DRM is different from a proprietary core format.

Thanks,
David

TeleRead: Bring the E-Books Home
http://www.teleread.org
Blog:
http://www.teleread.org/blog

[SpiderMatt]

Too bad about the DRM. The idea of being able to buy downloadable movies and have them be ready to play on my Creative Zen Vision: M would have been exciting. However, a new DRM will likely make it unreadable to players already on the market. After all, how is a player supposed to recognize and open DRM files if the DRM hasn't even been created/used yet.

What are the chances Sony will open their reader up to new formats? I'd say very slim for the near future. iTunes has had a very negative impact on the way companies like Sony and Amazon think in terms of creating digital content. I'm sure Sony created the Connect store to become the iTunes of e-literature. The project was a bit ambitious since there aren't nearly as many people to market ebooks to as there are music, since downloading music was already in full-swing when iTunes came along. So Amazon comes up with the idea of giving people ebooks without having to use a PC. The functions of the Kindle are pretty ingenius on Amazon's part. They've practically made it foolproof. I haven't used the thing yet, but from what I hear, it's pretty damn simple. Kudos to Amazon. Unfortunately, they didn't adopt the "open format" method they use for their increasingly popular mp3 music site. I believe this has a lot to do with publishers still being too uneasy to lure into the electronic market without DRM. This will eventually change. Before that happens, though, Sony is going to lose the format war. Amazon definitely has the edge here with more books and easier use. One of two things will probably happen when Sony loses. They will open their reader to other formats or they will stop making the Readers altogether. Given how well the Reader has been doing, I think Sony will opt to open it to other formats. But who knows how the Reader will be doing months from now as the Kindle gains in popularity and consumers.

[NatCh]

Sony folks have said several times that they're interested in supporting more e-book formats on the Reader.

[kezza]

Before DivX was the pirate's format of choice, it was Disney's self-destructing, disposable DVD format. This was back in 1998 or 99. You had to buy a special player for Disney DivX discs, and they would only play a certain number of times, within a pre-set time frame before they became unplayable.
So DivX was the DRM monster before it died as a consumer electronics format and became the de facto standard for pirates everywhere.

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by kezza

Before DivX was the pirate's format of choice, it was Disney's self-destructing, disposable DVD format. This was back in 1998 or 99. You had to buy a special player for Disney DivX discs, and they would only play a certain number of times, within a pre-set time frame before they became unplayable.
So DivX was the DRM monster before it died as a consumer electronics format and became the de facto standard for pirates everywhere.

You're conflating two different systems with unfortunately similar-sounding names. Circuit City (not the mouse) was the perpetrator of the DIVX format of "no need to return them" disks.

DivX (as in the format) is a completely unrelated thing.

Xenophon

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

You're conflating two different systems with unfortunately similar-sounding names. Circuit City (not the mouse) was the perpetrator of the DIVX format of "no need to return them" disks.

We never had those in this country, but are we talking about the DVDs that were supplied in sealed packed, and which reacted with air to become unplayable a certain number of hours after opening the packet?

What was the objection to those? I thought it sounded like a brilliant idea for DVD rental stores to save all the bother of having to return them.

AFAIK, they didn't require a special player - they were perfectly normal DVDs other than the fact that they had an oxygen-sensitive dye in the material from which they were made.

[tompe]

No, we are talking about

http://www.dvdjournal.com/extra/divx.html

Put briefly, Divx discs are $4.49 movies on digital video discs with an additional encryption scheme. Divx discs require a Divx player (a.k.a. "DVD player with Divx enhancement"), and can be viewed for one 48-hour period, beginning when the disc is first inserted into the player. Divx movies rarely come in widescreen versions, and they offer none of the "extras" that are commonly found on open DVDs. Because the consumer owns the Divx disc, he/she never has to return it, and he/she can watch the Divx movie again by paying $3.25 for another 48-hour viewing period.

[HarryT]

Looks like it's Flexplay that I was thinking of.

[Liviu_5]

I remember too the divx fiasco. Despite claims to the contrary, people is not stoopid

The movie, music studios and whoever follows their lead in thinking so, is learning it again and again the hard way by losing tons of money and opportunity (see the Wal Mart online movie store fiasco for the most recent example)