IBM Files DVD Spam Patent Application 170
An anonymous reader writes "Mark Wilson of Gizmodo.com reports that IBM is applying for a patent for DVDs that contain or download 'on demand' commercials that cannot be skipped. Consumers would be able to purchase these DVDs at a lower price than regular DVDs and pay extra to enjoy their purchase ad-free without having to buy a second DVD. Perhaps this is part of the massive shift in advertising that IBM predicts."
Spam? (Score:5, Insightful)
The thing that distinguishes spam from commercial mail is that it's unsolicited. These discs sound like they suck, but they're not spam. (I note the linked article doesn't mention spam either)
And I predict that any advertising that .... (Score:4, Insightful)
If I see an add which annoys me, I will try pretty hard to avoid that company in the future.
So companies should not try to figure out "How do we FORCE people to see our adds", but "What can we do that people WANT to see our adds".
THAT is the big shift in marketing that could save the advertising business.
Also, since this idea is based on the DVD player having an connection to the internet, it would be pretty simple to set up the local network in a way that redirects all download attempts to a local server which just gives out 0-second spots or something.
I hope they enforce their patent.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Then again, who cares anyway. TV is already dead, now if DVD's also get killed by gratuitous advertising left, right and center, it will only drive people towards other alternatives (such as iTunes or using bittorrent) even faster.
In fact, this has been happening for a while, what with many DVD-players forcing you to watch the MAFIAA warnings they put in front of each and every movie these days.
Re:Where do I sign up? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Where do I sign up? (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm a movie fan... I enjoy them without "people".
Step one (Score:4, Insightful)
But who wants to advertise to cheapskates? (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is, the ad people probably wouldn't be too happy about only advertising to people who are by definition parsimonious.
a glimpse into the present (Score:3, Insightful)
Advertisers are little kids who think we are paren (Score:5, Insightful)
Think about it, little kid asks for something, parent says no. Kid logic kicks in and the kid starts whining about it, bad parenting responds and gives in, proving to the kid that whining works.
Advertisers ask us to buy X with ads, we say NO. Advertisiers logic kicks in and starts forcing us to watch the AD, do we give in? Doesn't really matter, if we don't, they just push harder and if we give in, then IT WORKS, so they push harder to sell even more!
F1 racing used to be broadcast by every country in europe, this was great because in olden days it meant you could choose your preffered commentator (if you live in holland you get English, Dutch, Belgian and German state TV on cable) ALL without commericial breaks. Then came some commercial channels that outbid the state tv offerings, so people stopped watching the feed from that country and just watched F1 in a foreign language. When the Dutch F1 broadcast went commericial I switch to the BBC and when that went commericial I switched to Belgian tv.
When that too went commerercial, I stopped watching F1. The commercial breaks were just too many to put up with.
So what has the F1 organisation achieved? They lost a viewer who at least saw all the regular ads on the racetrack because they wanted more money. So they wanted more and got nothing.
I may be alone, but viewing figures for F1 are down. They blaim it on the races themselves but might it just be that people are sick to death of the show being interrupted constantly for ads?
A similar story can be seen around Dutch soccer. That was broadcast by tradition by the NOS, the state part of state telivision. (I am not a soccer fan so excuse me if I get some details wrong) Years ago a commercial channel was launched (sport 7?) which would be pay-per-view like setup. People didn't subscribe. At all. It was a HUGE FLOP. They had totally miscalculated dutch willingness to pay for soccer matches. They thought they would be rich, they ended up bankrupt.
So the license went back the next year to the NOS. Recently another new station launched, this time "free" to watch, Talpa, and it too made a really big deal out of getting SOME of the rights to some of the soccer matches. Again they thought they would make it big, but people just didn't watch. The way the matches were broadcast was a constant source of irritation among soccer fans and the ads were way to heavy.
End result? Talpa went bust and soccer matches are now more or less back in the old format.
The odd thing? Holland is soccer nuts, so what could go wrong with pushing lots of ads around soccer matches? It works in the US right?
Well, in theory it might be simply a case of too much too soon, you have to remember that it is not that long ago that the only ads were BEFORE and AFTER a match NOT during NOT even during half-time. Even more shocking, on sunday there were NO ADS AT ALL.
This has changed but still, ads during the match itself may have been too much.
A clear case of being too demanding, kids KNOW this, they know when to push it and when they are about to be sent to their room. Advertisers just don't seem to be able to spot the warning signs. They keep pushing and pushing when we already kicked them out of the house to freeze to death.
The reason is offcourse simple, advertisers do NOT care about selling a product with their ads, they are selling ADS!
Every obnoxious ad campaign that drives you nuts HAS ALREADY BEEN A SUCCESS because the ad SOLD!
So us claiming that the ads for MS software on slashdot are a stupid idea are missing the real picture. The ad company that sold those ads, made a sale and that is all that matters. That is why you should never believe any research on ad effectiveness by an ad company unless you believe research on soap by soap companies.
Re:DVD players with guns (Score:5, Insightful)
2010. The player has motion and thermal sensors. Any heat-producing or moving entity in the proximities will receive a hit of "pain microwave ray" unless they see the full advertising.
2015. Your salary goes directly to the MPAA so they can decide what you are going to buy every month. Nobody remembers what a movie is.
my predictions (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Spam? (Score:5, Insightful)
First you need to see the Copyright notice (no skip), then you get 2 disney logos (the one with Ting and the Buena Vista one, no skip).
Then you have no less than 8 "Comming to DVD" Disney films. Thankfully those can be skipped, but not directly. For some reason, you need to press skipp 8 times. And no, "Menu" doesn't get you directly to the ..ehmm...menu..
Sometimes i don't care to press skip and rather let my son watch the whole thing.. they win again..
And worst of all, those Disney VDs are in fact more expensive than those from other studios which have less ads.. Go figure
So i rather pay less for the same ads (I doub they'll have more than Disney anyway).
But won't the content be online eventually? (Score:3, Insightful)
From an engineering point of view, putting stuff on plastic disks and physically moving them to their destination is a pretty dumb way to distribute content in the face of an Internet.
In the absence of a successfully viable Internet distribution method that ensures some form of copy restriction, the likely reason for movies on DVD is to safeguard distribution rights. But things may change if the current method of funding Internet content through advertising is to expand to include television and movies, much like it does for broadcast TV and radio. So while IBM may hope to gain a market share in DVD advertising, the whole medium may be obsolete in a few years. Just a thought.
Is it that IBM is predicting this change ... (Score:3, Insightful)
This will encourage consumers to break the law. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wow that's great (Score:5, Insightful)
This is new? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Where do I sign up? (Score:3, Insightful)