Don't have Amazon Prime? Students can get a free 6-Month Amazon Prime trial with free 2-day shipping, unlimited video streaming & more.
If you're not a student, there's also a free 1-Month Amazon Prime trial available.
You can also earn cash back rewards on Amazon and Whole Foods purchases with the Amazon Prime Visa credit card. Read our review to see if it’s the right card for you.
I'm not sure "do not buy" is a good blanket statement, but perhaps 'be aware you are entering a long term licensing period with no set end date so you may not have access to the content forever' is more fitting.
I too think digital ownership is a little sketchy however $5 to 'own' a movie for a a decade is better than re-renting the film multiple times. I personally don't watch the same movie over and over again but I know plenty of people who do. Especially those with kids. By the time the digital license is revoked you or your kids will probably not care anyway.
Now, a strong point against digital ownership content being edited or censored after release. Only physical ownership is immune to that but will you have a device to watch that on a decade from now is another discussion.
I occasionally will buy digital, but folks who think there's no risk in losing your content have way too much faith in corporate America. Ask all those people who bought Discovery owned digital assets from the Sony PlayStation store that have permanently lost access to their assets. Ask Wii owners who lost access to their digital assets.
You might think these things are minor, but the point it, you're at the mercy of the company for any decisions and on their timeline.
I buy most of my stuff using Blu-ray.com[blu-ray.com] Similar price deals and you've got physical media to fall back on. ( not to mention how massively better quality it is. But the average consumer doesn't even have 5.1 surround sound, much less care about 50Mbit 4K bitrates )
I know the cost is small on a per item basis. Just look at Sony and Discover both recently revoking access to purchased content[playstation.com]. US leadership in technology development cant seem to understand that when I "purchase" somethng it doesnt mean that I am merely leasing it, renting it, or otherwise temporarily utilizing it. But, hey, its just bizarre what-if scenarios that I am imagining, right? Right? Access to purchased digital content will never be revoked, right? Am I right? SMH.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
You realize that is no longer true right. Sony and Discovery worked out their licensing, no one is losing anything. Says so right at the top of your link.
Its good that they worked it out. Issue still remains, as Sony and Discover told us, that what we are purchasing is not ours is not a real purchase but a rental for as long as they see fit to provide it.
Me: Beware because digital might not be 'forever,' still fine as long as you are okay with the possibility the service could shutter or pull content years from now.
You: Shill!!!!!!
Me: Huh, shilling for what or whom?
You: "predatory behavior!!!!"
Me: https://static.slickdealscdn.com/ima...t-rolleyes.gif
I cannot keep track of everything everyone has said. Inasmuch as I said "a lot of shills" you should assume I was referring, not just to you, but to several comments by several people.
You seem pretty extreme in your stance on directors being able to sell you a movie and then alter that movie later on if they feel like it, and this is the stance that included you in my judgement.
I'm not speaking of what the law IS, but what it should be. These movies are being sold as things you own, not as long-term rentals. Obviously, it's too much to ask that companies host them for all eternity, but saying they're free to pull them any time they feel like it is also wrong. People think of them, rightly so, as movies they purchased. I'm glad you are warning them they are not.
But what you said that I object to so much concerns the powers of the license holders. The fact that some director could get religion and decide that all violence is bad, or that depicting aliens is Satanic, or that all the main heroes should be of a particular gender or race, and not just cease to sell the movie, but go back and alter all the previous movies sold is an absurd situation. And for you to take the position that any director can reach into your movie collection, that you have purchased, any time he feels like it and alter the content in any way he pleases, is absurd and seems the height of shillery, paid or not.
The site has ben around for 15+ years. It's actually a blu-ray review website and forum, but they have price tracking APIs. They don't actually sell anything.. all the prices and purchase links are for Amazon.
They are somewhat unique in that they provide reviews of the Bluray's themselves... the quality of the transfer, bitrates, codec etc , any remastering video and audio quality etc. and they'll also talk about what extras the discs have. This allows you to have a detailed comparison of different releases of the discs. You'd be surprised but there have been several infamous cases where newer transfers were worse than the older ones. This is especially true of TV series where the publisher might attempt to squeeze more episodes on a single disc to save money
80 Comments
Your comment cannot be blank.
Featured Comments
I too think digital ownership is a little sketchy however $5 to 'own' a movie for a a decade is better than re-renting the film multiple times. I personally don't watch the same movie over and over again but I know plenty of people who do. Especially those with kids. By the time the digital license is revoked you or your kids will probably not care anyway.
Now, a strong point against digital ownership content being edited or censored after release. Only physical ownership is immune to that but will you have a device to watch that on a decade from now is another discussion.
You might think these things are minor, but the point it, you're at the mercy of the company for any decisions and on their timeline.
I buy most of my stuff using Blu-ray.com [blu-ray.com] Similar price deals and you've got physical media to fall back on. ( not to mention how massively better quality it is. But the average consumer doesn't even have 5.1 surround sound, much less care about 50Mbit 4K bitrates )
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
You: Shill!!!!!!
Me: Huh, shilling for what or whom?
You: "predatory behavior!!!!"
Me: https://static.slickdealscdn.com/ima...t-rolleyes.gif
You seem pretty extreme in your stance on directors being able to sell you a movie and then alter that movie later on if they feel like it, and this is the stance that included you in my judgement.
I'm not speaking of what the law IS, but what it should be. These movies are being sold as things you own, not as long-term rentals. Obviously, it's too much to ask that companies host them for all eternity, but saying they're free to pull them any time they feel like it is also wrong. People think of them, rightly so, as movies they purchased. I'm glad you are warning them they are not.
But what you said that I object to so much concerns the powers of the license holders. The fact that some director could get religion and decide that all violence is bad, or that depicting aliens is Satanic, or that all the main heroes should be of a particular gender or race, and not just cease to sell the movie, but go back and alter all the previous movies sold is an absurd situation. And for you to take the position that any director can reach into your movie collection, that you have purchased, any time he feels like it and alter the content in any way he pleases, is absurd and seems the height of shillery, paid or not.
Such a huge difference in approaches.
They are somewhat unique in that they provide reviews of the Bluray's themselves... the quality of the transfer, bitrates, codec etc , any remastering video and audio quality etc. and they'll also talk about what extras the discs have. This allows you to have a detailed comparison of different releases of the discs. You'd be surprised but there have been several infamous cases where newer transfers were worse than the older ones. This is especially true of TV series where the publisher might attempt to squeeze more episodes on a single disc to save money