Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Government Media News

Samsung Sued Over "Defective" Blu-ray Player 222

Anneka notes that, although both Netflix and Best Buy threw logs on HD DVD's funeral pyre today, things are not all going Blu-ray's way. A Connecticut man is suing Samsung, the maker that brought the first Blu-ray players to market, over its "defective" BD-P1200 player. The lawsuit seeks class-action status. The problem is that the Samsung BD-P1200 is a "Profile 1.0" player that can't play some Blu-ray discs and Samsung has no intention (or ability) to upgrade these players via firmware. Quoting Ars: "The meager requirements of the 1.0 profile mean that Blu-ray players which fail to implement the optional features won't be able to take advantage of picture-in-picture, which requires secondary decoders. 1.0 players are also unable to store local content, lacking the 256MB of storage mandated by the 1.1 profile. Profile 1.1 discs should still play on 1.0 players, however, but the extra features will not work."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Samsung Sued Over "Defective" Blu-ray Player

Comments Filter:
  • by Wizarth ( 785742 ) on Monday February 11, 2008 @08:42PM (#22386092) Homepage
    I understand the point of people saying "It's Profile 1.0, not Profile 1.1, it does what it says on the box". But most customers won't look at that. They just see the BluRay logo, see the adverts for BluRay (which no doubt show off the features included in Profile 1.1) then want to know why their BluRay player can't do what the advertisement told them.

    At the least, it's misleading advertising. The Profile 1.0 player being defective is a bit of a stretch, but it's not unfounded.
  • by Draknor ( 745036 ) on Monday February 11, 2008 @08:43PM (#22386102) Homepage
    Just to clarify, according to TFA some movies won't play:

    At issue are some significant title-compatibility problems with the player. In his complaint, plaintiff Bob McGovern says that a number of movies he purchased after buying his BD-P1200 wouldn't play on the device.
    ...
    As one of our readers pointed out via e-mail, the P1200 has a checkered reputation when it comes to hardware reliability.


    So it may not be as simple of an issue as "profile 1.0 can't use spiffy new 1.1 features". It may be more an issue of "Samsung rushed buggy new product to market and now won't support it."
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 11, 2008 @08:50PM (#22386192)

    It will play Profile 1.1 discs - you can still see the video and hear the audio.
    Except it doesn't, and Samsung refuses to provide an update to fix this - which is why the guy is suing.

    He isn't expecting the extra features - he just wanted to have the discs play in the first place. According to the lawsuit, the player refuses to even read them.

    The problem has nothing to do with Profile 1.1 - it's a flaw with BD+ [wired.com].

    He got screwed over by DRM. I would have thought Slashdot would be more sympathetic to someone screwed over by DRM than to instead blame him for buying "too early" whereby "too early" is apparently six months ago.
  • by MWoody ( 222806 ) on Monday February 11, 2008 @09:02PM (#22386302)
    1) Recordable compact discs have their own logo and are considered a different, but analogous, media format. A player that will play compact discs, with no mention of recordable or rewritable versions in the packaging, doesn't have to play anything.

    2) A DRM-crippled "CD" will not bear the Compact Disc logo, as it doesn't conform to the standard. It is a separate format that just happens to sometimes sort-of work in CD players.

    Meanwhile, the movies mentioned in the article all come with a "blu-ray disc" logo on them, despite there being two distinctly different formats involved. That's misleading advertising, and I hope he wins his case. You can't create a so-called standard and then say "whoops, need to change a few things here, sucks to be you if you were an early adopter!" I understand that the bleeding edge sometimes cuts, but that's usually a result of bugs in the players or the manufacturing process, not because some idiot changed the specs of the format!
  • by Sethb ( 9355 ) <bokelman@outlook.com> on Monday February 11, 2008 @10:27PM (#22387190)
    I have one of these players, and we're not upset about Profile 1.1 vs 1.0, we're upset that it's a total crapshoot whether or not a given movie will play on your player. I got mine in September, this isn't a device that's three years old, either, but it has been plagued with bugs. I rented Weeds from Netflix, and the disc would play fine ONCE, but not a second time (confirmed with others on AVSForum). Rise of the Silver Surfer didn't work for a month or two after release. Deja Vu would constantly hang during playback. Pirates of the Carribean 3 didn't work until last week, nor did Little Miss Sunshine. 3:10 to Yuma still doesn't work, and last week I sat down to watch Across the Universe to find that you're left at the menu screen, but with no cursor to start the movie, and you can't even skip to a chapter or work-around the issue.

    Samsung needs to figure out what the hell is wrong with their firmware and correct it so that it'll actually play movies, and they need to be more transparent about what's going on. They rarely acknowledge issues, and never document what fixes are in new firmware revisions as they're released. Perhaps they could give some test units to the shops that are authoring Blu-Ray discs, or, you know, get an advance copy of the disc so that firmware can be ready on the day the movie hits the streets. Follow this thread [avsforum.com] at AVSForum for more info.
  • DVD-Video != DVD-ROM (Score:3, Informative)

    by tepples ( 727027 ) <tepples.gmail@com> on Monday February 11, 2008 @10:29PM (#22387208) Homepage Journal

    PS2 games carry the DVD logo and they wont work on just any DVD player!
    That's because PlayStation 2 games use the "ROM" profile, not the "VIDEO" profile. Look below the DVD logo on the packaging of a DVD-Video or DVD-ROM disc to see which profile it uses.
  • Fact Check (Score:3, Informative)

    by dank zappingly ( 975064 ) on Monday February 11, 2008 @10:39PM (#22387300)
    You've gotta be kidding. Who modded this guy up? I know that anti-Sony opinions are popular here, but this is just insane. The PS3 has not cost $600 since June of 2007. Welcome to 2008. PS3 is currently selling for $400 or $500 depending on the model. You can buy a regular Blu Ray player for $350. Blu Rays are available for less than $25. Take a look at Amazon.com. HD-DVD players are selling for $150 because no one wants to buy a player that is already obsolete.
  • by BosstonesOwn ( 794949 ) on Monday February 11, 2008 @11:43PM (#22387802)
    While i agree the lawsuit is bogus , I think this does send a message. And that message is stop making the end user a beta tester.

    You mention networking gear. It doesn't really hold up here. When people bought "pre-N" gear , and "draft-N" gear , they knew what they were getting themselves into. These blu-ray players were sold as blu-ray players. Meaning they would play all future blu-ray movies. Funny I have an old RCA dvd player that plays new dvds, yeah I guess I am expecting to much for it to not randomly reject blu-ray discs.

    Look they sold this as a blu-ray player , one should expect it to play every blu-ray disc, be it new or old as long as the disc is in good condition. These things are flaking out on people and not playing some discs , blocking features ( which I admit is really the problem I hate. ) That and the fact that they are now adding more features while increasing the core of the device itself , meaning they are changing specs mid stream. Something that HD DVD knew would happen and put the specs out to combat , they wanted one set standard , it seems like the blu-ray standard is not a standard and an ever evolving mess.
  • by aXis100 ( 690904 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2008 @01:09AM (#22388418)
    Off topic -

    I've probably got the same Toshiba DVD player as you, and have found a fix for burned disks. Basically you need to change the "BitSetting" feild in your DVD burner so that the disks get marked as "DVD-ROM" instead of "DVD-R" or "DVD-R/W". This has fixed nearly all of my issues.

    There's several different bitsetting programs around depending upon the drive manufactuerer - try google.
  • by penix1 ( 722987 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2008 @02:54AM (#22388990) Homepage
    From TFA:

    As we pointed out in our coverage of the 2.0 spec, there's no upgrade path for older players due to the changed hardware requirementsa simple firmware update will not suffice.


    Ummm...Even the summary, which is usually wrong in most cases, points out that it will play Blu-ray disks but lacks some of the special features found only in players that support the new standard. What this guy is bitching about is two different things. First, the fact that he can't upgrade (via a flash ROM or something) to the new standard. What he fails to understand is the new standard also requires different configurations of hardware that his player doesn't have (there's a reason it is called a NEW standard). This is the bogus part of the suit.

    Second, he is bitching about the BD-P1200 in particular which does have a reputation for being a crap player even with the old specification and Samsung's refusal to address that issue. This is what that part of the suit boils down to:

    With HD DVD players hitting store shelves in April 2006, the Blu-ray Disc Association was feeling the pressure to get their products out as quickly. Samsung was first to market with a Blu-ray player, releasing the BD-P1200's predecessor, the BD-P1000, in June 2006 after a delay of a month or so. Like the first-generation P1000, the P1200 supported the original Blu-ray 1.0 profile. For a while, Samsung had the Blu-ray market to itself as Sony and Pioneer players were delayed even further. The competitive pressure from HD DVD was arguably the reason for approving Profile 1.0, even though it limited the potential of the first players and ensured that they'd never be compatible with future profiles.


    That is the angle he needs to play up. Samsung's willingness to make a quick buck at consumer expense in compatibility. If it can be proved that Samsung did this with full knowledge that they weren't going to support the player after the 2.0 spec release, WITHOUT informing the customer about it, then willful fraud comes to my IANAL mind.
  • by monsted ( 6709 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2008 @04:39AM (#22389498)
    Nope, these players fail to play *new features* on new discs. The original movie format should work just fine, but things like Picture-in-Picture and the persistent storage thing doesn't. This only means that some extras are unavailable. Thus, his player does what he paid for, but doesn't do what someone with a newer player paid for.

    In the end, we'll probably see Sony screw it up in another way to make his older player break completely, but that's a different story. BD+ will probably be on the receiving end of a lot of curses...
  • by cb95amc ( 99589 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2008 @06:19AM (#22389956)
    I would put that comparison more in line with VHS to DVD to Blu-Ray.....Those standards evolved over many years, not a matter of months.

    Its not like the manufacturers didn't know this was coming.....That was one of the problems with Blu-Ray, it was rushed to market to compete with HD-DVD (and for the PS3) and they hadn't finalized the standards...

    Don't forget we still have BD Live compatible players to come (Profile 2.0), which will mandate an Ethernet connection and more local storage (1GB) for downloadable content.
  • by samkass ( 174571 ) on Tuesday February 12, 2008 @11:59AM (#22392864) Homepage Journal
    When 2.0 comes out on disks, those will not play on any current player

    This is false, according to all the information I've read. The movies will play. But the "extra" features will lack capability.

    As for Blu-ray's reputed "more" space, show me a dual layer disk.

    Half of all current Blu-Ray movies are dual-layer. The first was "Click" a year and a half ago. Hitachi has a 4-layer Blu-ray disc they claim play in current players, and TDK has prototyped an 8-layer Blu-ray disc.

    As to the codecs, HD DVD supports more advanced codecs.

    It's true that some of the sound codecs are optional on Blu-ray players but mandatory on HD DVD players. That being said, on Blu-ray they are required to have substantially higher throughput if supported. For video, they both support exactly the same codecs (MPEG2, MPEG4/AAC, and VC-1). In addition, Blu-Ray requires the player support almost 50% more throughput-- that, combined with the higher capacity, means that Blu-ray discs can be compressed less and therefore have much higher quality audio and video. That's why a side-by-side comparison of the two almost universally favors Blu-ray on all the AV sites.

    Blu-ray is largely old technology with a new specification that makes them incompatible with everything else out there.

    To be fair, that more accurately describes HD DVD. That's why HD DVD players are easier to produce.

Saliva causes cancer, but only if swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time. -- George Carlin

Working...