BitTorrent Legit Service Launches

The launch of the BitTorrent Entertainment Network came out today; there's the AP write-up, which is decent enough but the interview with Bram about it is more interesting. Tangentially, the the education of lawmakers on video DRM is an interesting countweight to all this.

New BT network is proprietary, apparently

[writertype]

Disclaimer: I'm pimping my own story [pcmag.com] on PC Magazine.

I'd be interested to hear what people think of the new BitTorrent DNA 2.0, which apparently uses QOS to dial itself down in the presence of VOIP, etc. But it also apparently won't be open-sourced, and will be proprietary to the Mainline client.

And I'm not a big fan of all the snarky comments, myself.

WMP only???

[bugbeak]

From TFA:
BitTorrent's content is protected by Windows Media DRM and will only play back using Windows Media Player.

Is there a DRM alternative that is suitable on all platforms?

ToS

[Kelz]

Somewhat crippling ToS from the site (you must download and watch movies/TV shows before 30 days, can only watch it for 24 hours after first playing); and the kicker: $3.99 for rentals. Imo at least the charge should be half that. There is no distibution cost other than keeping the tracker/site up, and you can only watch it for a day! If I watched even 3 movies a month, it'd cost less to just go through netflix, and I could keep them as long as I wanted.

However, it is still good to see BT somewhat more in the public eye. Maybe it'll catch on and more people will realize that they're being ripped off.

Re:There wasn't legitimate bittorrent before?

[KDR_11k]

Some of those file downloading places (File Front, I think) use torrents, too, as does the TAS Videos website. Bittorrent has become a normal download system and a substitute for FTP and HTTP downloads, although it's not as widely used yet. Some MMOs even use torrents for distributing patches AFAIK.

I think the difference is that this is an "official" Bittorrent service (i.e. by the guy who invented it although that may not count for much considering the openness of the system) and that it sells stuff that gets distributed over BT instead of merely offering free downloads.

Teach a person how to fish...

[ThePlaydoh]

Finally the big studios are getting with the program and embracing new technology ... OHNOES!! Have you seen the usage requirements/restrictions? Once again they have shot themselves in the foot.

Instead of giving the people what they want, they are following down the same stupid path as always. At least some good will come of this...

Now the average person who wasn't really familiar with BitTorrent can learn how and what it is used for from this site and then go to another site and download it for free. Thanks for the lesson BitTorrent.com !

Can someone say www.allofmovie.com soon ?

Legit? Legit where?

[Findeton]

I live in Spain and here it's absolutely legal to download or upload copyrighted material without paying. What is punished is to make profit of it, but if you download, let's say, the movie 300, which hasn't been released on the cinemas yet, well, that's absolutely legal (i'm not joking). And we're ready to fight back if any politician here wants to change this.

So, when you say 'legit' p2p, what do you mean? do you mean legit in the USA, UK, or where?

Re:There wasn't legitimate bittorrent before?

[JesseMcDonald]

...you seem toconveniently [sic] forget that intellectual property rights were included even before amendments were proposed.

Perhaps you stop and reread the Constitution before making such a sloppy argument. The Constitution allows Congress "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries". Note that Congress isn't required to enact copyrights and patents; it merely has the ability to do so under the Constitution, with a very specific purpose: promoting "the Progress of Science and useful Arts". Copyrights and patents, in other words, are an attempt at social engineering, one which Congress can enact or withdraw at its leisure. They are also transient ("for limited times") whereas real property rights are permanent, passing from one generation to the next until the property is finally consumed or abandoned by its owner -- even presuming such ever occurs.

In contract, regular property rights are barely mentioned in the Constitution, because they were already thoroughly established in the Common Law; real property rights formed a background so obvious to the Constitution's authors that they saw no need to make them explicit; copyrights and patents had to be mentioned precisely because they were not part of that background. Congress can revoke them on a whim because they exist purely by Congressional decree. There are some (badly worded and poorly interpreted) clauses which Congress can abuse to violate traditional property rights under very specific circumstances, but as such rights do not originate with Congress it would take more than a simple decree to eliminate them entirely. (It would probably take a major Constitutional amendment, a change in the very nature of the government itself.)

Re:So I watched the Oscars last night...

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone might actually think they want this to fail.

It seems fairly obvious: if you offer a new product, intended to compete with/replace an old product, the new product should offer some advantage. Yet every attempt at digital distribution by the media industries offers an inferior product at an equal or greater price (even as the cost of distribution drops to nothing).

If it does fail, as it is practically guaranteed to do under these terms, then the industries will have more "evidence" that additional draconian laws are required to "save the artists." One might suspect that this is their intent.

Re:Selling content in the modern world.

[edmicman]

I've been saying the same thing for some time now. The "winner" in this whole media ordeal in the coming years will be the person/company (Google?) that gives me access to ALL CONTENT when and how I want it, for a price. Imagine if all historical media content was as ubiquitous as television, or what the Internet is approaching to be. Part of the whole reason people collect DVDs, download torrents, DVR programs, is because they want the security of knowing that that content will be available whenever they want it. What if there was a monthly service, like your internet or cable (or maybe it becomes a part of that?) that in turn gives you the ability to watch/listen/whatever any sort of media content that exists. You "subscribe" to The World. All historical movies, television shows, music, from all publishers, available in one place all the time, ready for you to search and bring up whenever you want. Throw in current stuff, too. Albums aren't released in stores, they just show up in The Network, and you can listen when you want. You can watch the latest episode of "24" whenever you want. Throw in wifi access tied to your cars, so you can do all of this mobile, too. How much would you pay for a service like that?