Quantcast
PC World's Techlog
News, opinion, and links from Editor in Chief Harry McCracken.

BitTorrent: Buy, Rent, or Steal?

Posted by Harry McCracken | Sunday, February 25, 2007 9:43 PM PT

Big BitTorrent news in the offing: The peer-to-peer file distribution service's site is down at the moment, and when it returns, it'll apparently offer The BitTorrent Entertainment Network, which--in partnership with Warner Bros., 20th Century Fox, Paramount, and MGM--will offer official, entirely legit movies and TV shows.

According to an Associated Press story, TV shows will sell for $1.99 apiece--same as on iTunes--and movies will rent for $3.99 (new stuff) and $2.99 (old stuff). Everything's copy-protected using Microsoft DRM and will only play in Windows Media Player 11; movie rentals will expire 30 days after you buy them or 24 hours after you start watching. (I haven't seen any definitive word on whether you'll be able to transfer video to other devices, but if so, it'll presumably only be to ones that support Microsoft DRM--for which read "almost everything but the iPod.")

BitTorrent's P2P protocol has always done an impressive job of getting files from one place to another, in part because it really gets them from multiple places to another, intelligently patching together a seamless whole from disparate parts stored on PCs across its network. That approach will stay for this new commercial download service, which in theory may make for zippier downloads than with iTunes and other competitors. And these authorized movies and TV shows should be more dependably good-looking than the pirated content that people have been swapping via BitTorrent since it arrived on the scene in 2001.

Of course, the pirated content that people have acquired via Torrents has always been free and free of restrictions; these new authorized downloads won't be. This is, as far as I can think, the first time that a major file-transfer service used for illegitimate content swapping will also be used for downloads sanctioned by big copyright owners. (The original Napster announced plans to institute copy controls but died before it could institute them; Kazaa can find and download copy-protected content, but sure has never emerged as a major force in above-board content distribution.)

With BitTorrent about to become a conduit for both copy-protected-and-official content and some of the same items in unprotected-and-questionable form, it could be an interesting test of an old notion in the digital download wars: that folks who download pirated media for free would genially pay if the same content were easily available in higher-quality, affordable, legitimate form. BitTorrent is apparently saying that it thinks a third of BitTorrent users are willing to do so. I'm guessing that might be optimistic, but we'll see.

Also yet to be seen: whether the BitTorrent Entertainment Network will be slicker, less geeky, and more reliably reliable than BitTorrent in its traditional form. You'd kind of think it would need to be to be a compelling option for renting Superman Returns for $3.99. And you also have to wonder if a more corporate, commercial BitTorrent might be a turnoff for its current users.

The most interesting thing about the BitTorrent Entertainment Network may be...the fact that it isn't very interesting. Except for the pipe it happens to use, it sounds a lot like most of the other legit movie and TV download services out there, and it sounds more restrictive than some.

Me, I remain convinced that the the Internet is going to become the dominant means of distribution for video content far faster than most of us would have guessed just a few years ago. But it'll only happen if we see more services that make sense for consumers--by which I mean ones that give them plenty of flexibility in how, when, and where they do their consuming of entertainment. The BitTorrent Entertainment Network doesn't sound like a step forward in any of these areas.

More to come once I've had a chance to shell out some dough and download a movie or two...

Comments (5)

It won't turn users away like what happened in kazaa or morpheus because they were run by an organization and the entire network was controlled by their servers. Bittorrent creates a new network for each file. You download a torrent file which tells where this server is that is controlling the network.
The great thing about bittorrent is not so much that it's fast (because that depends on the number of users sharing the file) it's that it's cheap. You only need enough bandwidth to tell a computer where another computer is and enough storage to hold a few small torrent files (not the movie or tv show).
I don't see this working out though because most people will only leech. Then there won't be an advantage to BT anymore. If that doesn't kill the incredibly restrictive drm will. Only plays in WMP 11? That means no playing on your tv unless you happen to have your computer and tv hooked up. As for higher quality, it's pretty easy to find a straight dvd rip, which can be watched on any tv.

Raizen
February 25, 2007
11:15 PM PT

I dont understand how these companies will keep the torrent active. Currently a good torrent is seeded by users (coz its free and its for mutual benefit). If I'm paying for something, why should I seed its torrent?

Secondly, if there is something thats going to work only on Windows Media Player 11, thats another major drawback. People (like me) who prefer viewing movies on TV and if on PC, then using some other video viewers, this thing is not something that would attract me to download.

I seriosly doubt if this technology would get commercial success. And common.... the companies can't sell movies saying that it would be of a better quality. Nothing can be better than a DVD-rip - ripped using XViD.

venkat2cool
February 26, 2007
1:13 AM PT

Timeshifting Television has never been against the copyright laws until the fiasco that is DMCA came to be. Thus removing all fair-use consumer rights for television content. Indeed the MPAA lost the lawsuit against Betamax on this exact same grounds but did an end run around the issue in defiance with digital media. Since I typically use Bittorrent for television exclusively and pay a hefty subscription to Cable TV and internet services for this programing, as well as Purchasing Boxed DVD Sets of these programs once they become available; I will not be adding another layer of: what could be called "extortion"; just to secure my rights as a consumer. I will never pay a dime to the MPAA for a digital download and if they sue me, I got nothing to loose, I'll gladly live off the Federal government for life. If Everyone did this 2 things would happen. 1: MPAA couldn't afford to do it, and 2: the gov couldn't afford to jail all millions of offenders, so the law would have to change.

ingram091
February 26, 2007
3:27 AM PT

I didn't buy a 52" HD TV only to be told I can only watch these files on a 19" PC monitor. And I am not spending hundreds of my hard-earned dollars buying another PC dedicated to TV.

alienzen
February 26, 2007
9:27 AM PT

Its just a matter of time when someone pays for one of these shows or movies (if its not available for "free"), gets pissed off, uses a cam to record straight off the computer screen and offer these "lower quality" recordings for free...

This will never work, people have gotten used to not paying for stuff and its hard to beat 'free'..

RyanA
February 28, 2007
5:56 AM PT