MLB Fans Who Bought DRM Videos Get Hosed

Billosaur writes "Major League Baseball has just strengthened the case against DRM. If you downloaded videos of baseball games from MLB.com before 2006, apparently they no longer work and you are out of luck. MLB.com, sometime during 2006, changed their DRM system. Result: game videos purchased before that time will now no longer work, as the previous DRM system is no longer supported. When the video is played, apparently the MLB.com servers are contacted and a license obtained to verify the authenticity of the video; this is done by a web link. That link no longer exists, and so now the videos will no longer play, even though the MLB FAQ says that a license is only obtained once and will not need to be re-obtained. The blogger who is reporting this contacted MLB technical support, only to be told there are no refunds due to this problem."

No support? Hear from my lawyer.

The blogger who is reporting this contacted MLB technical support, only to be told there are no refunds due to this problem

I smell a class action coming along..

EULA?

Depends whether anyone saved a copy of the EULA they signed when they downloaded the videos.
If it favours MLB they'll find a copy. But if it doesn't, it would be quite easy for them to say "We've lost all copies of that EULA but our policy back then was to put in a 1-year time limit" and given the small numbers involved, probably no-one will be able to prove otherwise. I think I'll get in the habit of saving a copy before clicking on "I Agree" from now on.

Re:EULA?

No. It states that YOU cannot post a time bomb, not that they won't sell you one.

This is why DRM is evil, and so are EULAs when you are PURCHASING product.

Re:EULA?

I think I'll get in the habit of saving a copy before clicking on "I Agree" from now on.

Just out of curiosity, how are you planning to prove that the EULA you have is the one they made you agree to you?

How are they planning to prove that the EULA they have is the one you agreed to?

How exactly

Does that jibe with the legal requirement of any business entity to safe keep their legal documentation for a minimum period of seven years?

Claiming that an EULA is not a legal document sounds somewhat hypocritical.

Call 866-800-1275 and be a PITA

Call 866-800-1275 just to be a pain in the ass. I don't even watch baseball, but I called it to protest their treatment of customers. The guy was nice to me, and admitted they have a big problem, they will try to fix.

Re:No support? Hear from my lawyer.

They said no refunds would be given

and Comcast said no lawsuits. Guess what the courts said about that.

Translation?

"....there are no refunds due to this problem.""

It's your problem, not ours.

Re:Translation?

If the product is defective by design, and you buy it, and it turns out to be defective, the product is working as intended. I don't see what the problem is.

Re:Translation?

There may yet be a chance to settle it.

If you can dig up the credit card bills, you might still be able to do a charge-back. I know it's kind of pushing it, but my mom does the CC transactions for the family business, and she says that in some cases, there is time limit for a charge-back. It's really brutal for the merchant though, $15 fees per transaction on top of losing the money. Normally, I'd say doing a chargeback two years after the purchase is pretty dickish, this situation is ridiculous. I'd check your card's policies first, but once you know for sure, I suggest that you take it up with the customer service and threaten to do a charge-back before going through the procedure.

Re:Translation?

Seems reasonable. You got to use the video for two years. They got to use your money for two years. They take the video back, you take your money back. Fair is fair.

Re:Translation?

BTW - Discover - the card with the most worthless chargeback policy in the industry (amex is the best) will automatically reject any claim that has to do with a purchase more than 6 months ago.
While other cards have limits, the "clock restarts" in certain circumstances - for instance, if the product was sold with a 2 year warranty and they refuse warranty service, you're covered for x months after the claimed warranty expires to file a claim regarding warranty.
So, despite what the wonderful people at MLB claim, you'll probably be able to file a successful chargeback. If you get resistance from phone CSRs, file a written chargeback (crappy banks (chase, etc) can jerk you around a lot more over the phone)
BTW - Successful chargebacks are punitive to the merchants and a large number can significantly affect them financially, so this is the best way to get back at them.

Yea that's a shame...

Excuse me while I enjoy my NHL feed on YouTube :)

Re:Yea that's a shame...

Excuse me while I enjoy my MLB feed on Morpheus. Oh wait, I forgot - I stopped watching baseball the year they cancelled the world series.

My point, thoough, is that the only ones with functioning videos got them illegally.

-mcgrew [kuro5hin.org]

Re:Yea that's a shame...

In any case, those people who obtained pirate copies often have a superior experience to legit buyers. All this does is encourage more piracy.

A Slow Death

I don't think DRM is going to go away until a lot more people get burned by it in this way. Most people don't understand or care, once something like this rears up and bites them in the ass, the outrage machine will start. Thank you, MLB, for being the obnoxious, monopoly-driven organization we've all come to love to hate.

Re:A Slow Death

Digital TV and the assault on the VCR/DVR is going to be the telling moment in the fight against DRM. Everybody's got a TV, and just about everyone has either set their VCR or DVR to record a show or movie for them or gotten their nine-year-old child to do it for them. When the media companies finally get their way and Joe and Jane Sixpack can no longer freely re-watch "It's a Wonderful Life" to their heart's desire every holiday season, there will be outrage. Of course, by that time, the technology will be so entrenched that it will be next to impossible to remove it.

Re:A Slow Death

Digital TV and the assault on the VCR/DVR is going to be the telling moment in the fight against DRM.

A day doesn't go by when my Series3 TiVo doesn't tell me some HD programming it recorded is not authorized for display over an HDMI connection. (WTF?! Component I could understand, but why the hell would it prevent playing over HDMI?) So far I've managed to get around it by one or more of going back to Now Playing and selecting the recording again, turning the HDTV off and back on, or turning the HDMI switchbox between them off and back on.

Re:A Slow Death

...especially when the alternative is suffering the look from Wife 2.0 (I upgraded to the model with the nicer case) when, Cthulhu forbid, she can't watch Dancing with the Stars because of some HDMI BS.

Completely off-topic, but I think using phrases suchs as "Wife 2.0" and "I upgraded to the model with the nicer case" are the real reasons you get that look in the first place.

Re:A Slow Death

When the media companies finally get their way and Joe and Jane Sixpack can no longer freely re-watch "It's a Wonderful Life" to their heart's desire every holiday season, there will be outrage.

Angry mob: "Hey! Where are those digital rights we gave you to manage? We want them back!"
Jimmy Stewart: "Well I don't have your rights here, they're in Bill's house, and in Steve's house..."

One more reason...

This is one more reason not to pay money to watch grown men sweat a lot and scratch themselves. A few more of things like this and I am going to just give it up completely.

Re:One more reason...

Correction. This is another reason why you shouldn't pay money for DRM'ed content.

Re:One more reason...

I've bought "Dire Straits - Brothers in Arms" 4 times now.

Talk about your "Money for Nothing"!

Re:One more reason...

NO NO NO!

Don't fall into this trap! You did not purchase a license, you purchased a copy. There are huge differences in the rights you acquire when you purchase a copy vs. a license to view.

hmmm.

In a highly litigious culture, about a sport which borders on an obsession, about access perceived as a right...?

I predict the big winners in this one will be the lawyers....

Re:hmmm.

Access which you purchase with the proviso that it will always be there IS a right. It's fine to make fun of baseball, fans, and our culture, but if someone sold you a book, and told you you'd always be able to read it, and then two years later you couldn't -- well, to it bluntly, that's fucked. MLB needs to provide the access, or refund the money. It wasn't a time-limited purchase, and MLB is on the hook for this.

Agreed, mostly...

But your comparison is a little off. Is someone sold me a book with a fishy modem and a giant electronic lock strapped to it.

I wish I had that kind of time

DRM sucks, and inevitiably produces unfair situations like this, where legitimate licencees get screwed. But having said that, what kind of person has so much time on their hands that they would ever want to watch a baseball game from previous seasons? And I thought posting to Slashdot was a time waste ;)

Re:I wish I had that kind of time

People who *play* any given sport will often watch old games. If your coaching someone in a sport, showing the players your coaching an old game is a very good way to show and explain examples.

Doesn't matter how many

Not the point how many people are affected. The point is that they can take it away from you when they feel like and say, "Suck it". What are you going to do? File a class action lawsuit where the lawyers actually make some cash and you get coupons for 20% expired peanuts at your local teams next away game.

Whoa now...

I'm pretty sure we're not allowed to talk about this without the express written consent of Major League Baseball.

Re:Whoa now...

Do you have the express written consent of Major League Baseball and the American Broadcasting Company?

Just ABC.

*sound of gunfire*

Re:Whoa now...

They gave me express written consent, but it's in this document that I can't read any more.

Phoning home is OK for E.T.

I don't want any product hardware, software, or DRM media that must phone home for permission to work. Too much a risk that the company will go out of business, or decide maintaining the service is no longer profitable.

If this story is true, I think a class action lawsuit is in order...

No surprise there...

Hmmmmm...I wonder what will happen to all those iTunes songs once Apple moves to a new DRM or non-DRM format in the future and stops supporting their old format???

Re:No surprise there...

Same thing that happened to people who bought into Microsoft's "Plays for Sure" system and then bought a Zune?

Ooops... I found it hilarious that the first company to break compatibility with a system called "Plays for Sure" was the company that created the system... (Note that I said break it, companies which never implemented it in the first place don't count.)

Thank You MLB

I just want to say Thank you to MLB for this. The more cases of things like this screwing over the consumer the sooner we can see DRM die the death it deserves. So again...Thank you MLB.

DRM - Don't Restrict Me

The unofficial motto of the Amazon MP3 store: http://weill.org/photos/show/recent/photo/1832021825/ [weill.org]

Yes, but...

It's MLB.

The videos already wouldn't play if it was Cold. Or Raining. Or Night. Or Outside.

Unlocking Software

MLB should release unlocking software for the old DRM scheme, even if all the software does is apply the new scheme instead. DRM doesn't have to mean that the files you purchase suddenly become useless, if the company actually takes responsibility for it and fixes it. It's ethically their responsibility to rectify any damage their actions do to other people's property. But there's probably some clause saying that the people don't actually own the video, and are thus under no obligation to ensure the playability of the file. What's worse is that people aren't technically allowed to do it themselves, thanks to the DMCA. I think, however, that MLB is going to learn the meaning of the old saying: "those who aren't permitted to do, sue".

MLB Strikes Out Fans Who Bought DRM Videos

Fixed the headline for you.

People just don't get it, companies that use DRM..

do not give a hoot about their customers. If they did, they would understand what DRM means and would protect a consumers property so that it is useful in the future. Companies do not care and people should give them the finger for not caring about those that would patronize their services.

Sounds like a class-action lawsuit...

...to me.

I can't wait for this to go to court

After the judge sides with the plaintiff, he'll take a printout of the sentence "any rebroadcast, reproduction, or other use of the pictures and accounts of this game without the express written consent of Major League Baseball is prohibited" and shove it up Bud Selig's ass.

At least, that's what'll happen in my dreams.

Rob

Google Video killed purchased files too.

Coincides with what happened at Google when they killed off Google Video and all the files purchased there died. Excellent article on that mirrors what MLB just did - lose customer trust - and how it in the long run will destroy their chances of selling videos in the future.

Google Throws Lead Paint on Movie Download Market http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/7002/google-video.html [mp3newswire.net]

THINK OF THE CHILDREN

Seriously....

There must be a mom of one of the players that has lost precious video of her son. Get her out to front the issue for the masses ;)

I hate this kind of trick nowdays. I have a scanner driver that won't work and needs an update that requires being registered...registration page no longer exists :(

3D Baseball Cards

When this stunt works for MLB, resulting in people buying their <2006 videos again in the "new format", they'll finally roll out those 3D baseball cards. Sure, they need special glasses to view, but that keeps people who didn't pay for them from pirating them. Betcha can't wait for 2009, when they upgrade those goggles to the incompatible "widescreen" version!

this is not fascism

and the idiot who tagged it as such needs to read some history. This is BAD DRM, and sucks, and the people responsible are idiots and should be sued. but to equate not being able to watch sports videos with fascism is just immature bullshit that makes you look foolish. Don't cry wolf.

Took them long enough

If you downloaded videos of baseball games from MLB.com before 2006, apparently they no longer work and you are out of luck. MLB.com, sometime during 2006, changed their DRM system. Result: game videos purchased before that time will now no longer work

The change was made sometime during 2006, and its now October 2007, and people are only noticing this!?

Re:Took them long enough

The switched to the new system in 2006, but the old system kept working until April. In April, MLB said they would have a fix available shortly. Now they have changed to saying that they will not fix it.

People keep forgetting what DRM stands for

DRM - Digital Rights Management.

It's about THEIR rights, not yours.

Re:People keep forgetting what DRM stands for

Intellectual property is a fiction. It's an attempt to conflate non-physical legal protections with property to make them sound better. You have patents, copyright and trade marks. None of them are property, or have the properties of property. With physical property it is clear who has it, and who owns it, as there's only one physical thing. With patents, copyrights and trademarks, very different rules apply to different uses. Intellectual property conflates many different laws into one handy label, when they shouldn't be. It's sloppy thinking.

DRM is a technical measure over-enforcing copyright. It prevents the exercise of fair use. The DRM on the MLB videos is preventing people watching their purchased copies, and the seller has no intention of fixing it. DRM has nothing to do with protecting patents or trade marks, just copyright. Distribution rights are not property.

But since we're playing this bad analogy between physical property and copyright protection, I again point out that after I buy something from a store, and take it home, it's mine to do with as I please. It's my property. If I break criminal law with it, I get investigated and prosecuted by the police. If I break a civil law with it, I get sued by the other party. At no point after I've left the mall do the guards get involved with this.

With DRM, I buy a copy of copyrighted material infected with DRM. The DRM decides what I get to do with my property, regardless of its legality. It decides what computer I play it on. It decides where I can play it. It decides whether I'm allowed to use extracts for parody or news commentary. It's unthinking rules standing over my shoulder, saying yes or no to what I can do with my purchased property, despite all of them being legal.

DRM is poisonous to fair use and normal use, and removing it or telling others how to remove it is prohibited by law. That is wrong. If mall guards did what DRM does, I'd refuse to shop at that mall too. Bet those people who bought the MLB videos wish they hadn't bought them now.

Not the first time, not the last, but a good start

This happened before. And it will happen as long as people buy cripplified content. ANY content that requires you to contact its maker before it plays has the chance to follow this road. No contact, no content.

This will happen again, I'm sure. Whenever some media company goes out of biz, whenever some media company decides that they can make more money by disabling everything they already sold, this will strike again. And more people will get pissed.

Unfortunately at the company that did it, not DRM itself. But given time, people will learn. People are used to "buying" content. They're used to buying a DVD and being able to play it 'til the earth stops turning. Changing this model will not go without resistance. It will take a while for the masses to notice that seemingly minor difference, but they will.

Unfortunately that takes time. Whether it takes too long we'll see. It will sooner or later fall back on them, though. People will stop buying content, fearing that it will some day stop to "work".

So what I started to do was to do some spinning myself. Whenever some friend of mine tries to buy something DRMified, I remind him of the time when whatever DRM crippled content backfired on him. Yes, it's another company, but it also got DRM, it just MIGHT do the same, ya know... Yes, it's a lie. Still, for some odd reason my conscience gives me an A-OK for it.

But, isn't that the real purpose of DRM?

To make you pay over and over again for the same content? Do you really think that when you lose your MP3 player with the songs locked to the hardware, that you WON'T have to buy those songs all over again? Do you really think that when you buy a new PC, you'll be able to use the licensed software that ran on the old PC? Face it, if it's got DRM, you didn't buy it -- you're just renting it!

Easy for society to fix this

Don't give copyright protection to publications that use copy protection. DRM -> PD. Let publishers (and their markets) decide which mutually-exclusive way to go.

The REAL Question is...

Who actually can spend the time watching a baseball game that is over 2 season old? Thats freaking dedication right there. Its one thing to watch a baseball game when you don't know whats going to happen next, but to watch one where you know the outcome... 2 years after the fact just blows my mind

MLB and Silverlight

MLB.com has made a lot of mistakes lately, the most recent being their commitment to Silverlight, Microsoft's "Flash-killer". It's really quite annoying and I refuse to download their plugin (is there even a plugin for Firefox?).

I love baseball, but MLB can be so draconian about things. They have a subscription service that I would totally sign up for if everything MLB.com touched didn't eventually rot.

Sue the Bastards

Sue the bastards for stealing back what they're already sold you. Do it as a Class. I expect they'll cave very quickly if they encounter some consumer push-back.

Easy - File Wire Fraud Complaint

If it works as they said, anyone affected can request their money back and, if denied, file a wire fraud complaint.

One down!

I've actually been a paying customer of the MLB.tv system for a few years now. I've liked the service purely for the streaming games; I'm the type of fan that can have as much fun watching the Royals playing the Angels as I would watching my Mets play.

Those days are over. I'm normally against DRM in the first place, and they almost lost me when they dropped RealPlayer support (and told Linux to fuck itself; I think that was a Microsoft forced hand). This is the final straw. It's too bad because honestly, it's a good service once you take that out.

I'll order MLB Extra Innings instead, and if I need to record something for posterity, I'll break out an old-fashioned VHS recorder. I won't have the archives anymore, but I'll live.

Meanwhile, I'll be looking into that NHL.com Centre Ice package online. Once they get archives, and if they eschew DRM, I'm in there.

Re:One down!

I'll order MLB Extra Innings instead,

So you take a company being noticed for screwing their customers, and you are looking for ways to give them more money. And people wonder why corporations think they can do anything they want without repercussions.

Copyright exemptions?

Didn't one of the fair use exemptions passed down by the Registrar of Copyrights involve DRM that was no longer supported?

Or am I totally misremembering?

Re:Copyright exemptions?

Didn't one of the fair use exemptions passed down by the Registrar of Copyrights involve DRM that was no longer supported?

Unfortunately, no [eff.org] (at least, not in such broad terms).

Small claims court.

Take MLB to small claims court. It's streamlined and can't be hijacked by lawyers the same way the normal court system is.

Not the first time

One word: Divx. Not the codec, the video-disc format. Did anyone seriously think that it wouldn't work out that way again?

First rule: Do not look into laser with remaining eye.

Hmmmm

Anyone remember MightyWords?

I work for MLB.com...

...and as an employee can honestly tell you that this latest DRM snafu is just that, a snafu. When the old DDS system has been taken offline, many people within the company predicted that this would happen, but this project has slipped due to technical difficulties. I for one feel really badly about how we're basically screwing the fans out of their money. As much as this is sad, however, I'd like to ask everyone to bear with us and let us work out a solution to this issue. We're not doing this on purpose, and a solution will be found.

I hope at least some of you would believe me, even though I have to post anonymously. I'm really just another geek working for a big corporation, trying to make ends meet.

Re:I work for MLB.com...

You say that *you* feel bad, and that a solution will be found, but I also work for big corporations and while I, the geek, may well want to spend time on doing something that is right, The Man (in the form of the bean-counters) often overrides me because it's not profit-making to do the right thing.

Maybe a solution will be found without antipathy. Or maybe it'll take a lawsuit to make the MLB bean-counters accept that a solution will be best for the company. Either way I agree that it is going to be found, and maybe the good that comes out of this is that everyone who likes baseball will learn to think twice before buying DRMed media.

Justin.

Re:I work for MLB.com...

I for one feel really badly about how we're basically screwing the fans out of their money. As much as this is sad, however, I'd like to ask everyone to bear with us and let us work out a solution to this issue. We're not doing this on purpose, and a solution will be found.

So MLB refusing refund requests is considered "not doing this on purpose" and "feeling really badly"? Please!

Just remove the DRM

Use FairUse4WM [doom9.org] to remove the DRM. Problem solved.

Well...

My word would be that anyone these days that keeps paying for a DRM Encoded file should be waiting for somethiing like this, there is NOT A FUCKING WEEK taht we dont ear a story like this, STOP PAYING FOR DRM FILES, simple.

HAhAhHAhAHahHAahaha

HAHA aHA Hahaha
HahAhaHahahAhaha
Hahahahaaa!!

Bruahahaha ...

Oh my stomach ...

Sorry guys. But this is such a ridiculous story.

Don't let anybody sell your memories as a service.

How many cases like this will it take

until people learn not to buy any DRM media?

Tom

When MS wants to boost Vista sales...

...they'll simply stop re-authorizing copies of XP. WGA will occasionally demand to call home, and will shut down Windows if it can't connect, or if it connects and doesn't get permission from Steve.

Any chance

Any chance that they can do this to my neighbors vacation movies?

Calling DVDJon

please pick up the white courtesy phone...

No, I said the white phone.

DRM has got to go!

Title says it all...

FYI, E-mail from MLB

I received the following e-mail from MLB.com today (I purchased a game in 2006, which still works!):

MLB.com Fri, Nov 9, 2007 at 7:36 AM
To: [e-mail]

Dear Valued Customer,

It has come to our attention that a small subset of our MLB.com Digital Download customers are unable to access and watch certain games that they purchased prior to 2007. MLB.com is committed to ensuring that all non-functioning MLB.com Digital Downloads that were previously purchased are again made available at no additional cost to our customers.

If you are unable to view any MLB.com Digital Download game that you purchased prior to 2007, please contact MLB.com Customer Service by either (1) sending an e-mail to [e-mail] listing the games that are no longer accessible, or (2) by calling 1-866-800-1275 to speak to a representative.

We will then send you an e-mail containing information on how to re-download and access these games. Please note that all Regular Season games will be available, in the originally purchased format, and all Postseason games will be made available, in the same format currently used on mlb.com/downloads.

We regret any inconvenience, and value your continued support.

Sincerely,
MLB.com

Re:Too bad it won't affect many...

How can you classify speculation as a fact?

Re:Too bad it won't affect many...

duh, this is slashdot. wild speculation of those that clothe themselves in tinfoil is taken as the gospel truth, no questions asked.

Re:Too bad it won't affect many...

Yeah BUT...

If it was 20 CHILDREN then my god something must be done! WHAT about the children?!?!

Re:Too bad it won't affect many...

Apparently, according to this study, [philanthropy.com] not as much as if it were just ONE child:

In another study, Paul Slovic, a psychology professor at the University of Oregon, found that people were more sympathetic to a single starving child than they were to two children facing the same plight.

"We cannot wrap our minds around two people as well as around one," said Mr. Slovic.

Re:Too bad it won't affect many...

More of a hypothesis, really. How many people who knew about such a thing would pay money to download a baseball game?

Re:Serves them right

Unfortunately, most people don't realise what DRM is or why it's bad...
They believe the marketing hype, designed to make people think it's a good thing. The people need to be educated about the dangers of DRM, and stories like this are good examples. People won't believe you without hard evidence, they're more likely to believe mass market propaganda.

Re:Too bad it won't affect many...

If that's so, I'm one of those 20. Granted, it was only two games (total cost: just under $8 USD), but it shows the system is fucked beyond reproach.

Re:Too bad it won't affect many...

If that's so, I'm one of those 20. Granted, it was only two games (total cost: just under $8 USD), but it shows the system is fucked beyond reproach.

This is the beauty of the system and the Internet. As people find out what doesn't work, they quit buying it. From your comment "it shows the system is fucked beyond reproach." shows me you are not going to be a repeat consumer. Between online rent-a-song for the Plays for Sure music to retractable email, to Vista Activation, the fact is DRM is killing sales of content as more get the fact the system is broken.

DRM, Activaction, and cost are the main reasons I left Vista upgrades out of my future plans. I have moved to Open Source. As such, DRM is now an incompatible format. I can't use DRM, so I don't buy it. Amazon got it. Apple is just now waking up to the fact.

DRM protects content. DRM kills sales. Some loss due to piracy is an issue. DRM is the answer. Some loss of sales is due to DRM. When that is a bigger problem than piracy, DRM starts to go away. It happened on floppys and came back on CDs. Items with high incidence of copyright violations is the only items with DRM on CDs. Most software CD's except Games and high cost MS products and some high priced music and movies (High Def formats) are free of DRM. Most all my purchased software CDs are DRM free.

Re:Serves them right

Serves them right. If you support DRM by buying this shit I don't feel sorry for you when it no longer works.
You got what you paid for and everybody told you so beforehand.

But what if you bought it knowing that someday it will no longer work so that you'll have standing to sue and drive a nail into the concept of DRM industry-width through the legal system?

The idea is to play them at their own game, and win.