Now its OK for Movie Downloads???

Where do I start. It is obvious the Load N'Go Video
issue(s) previously mentioned did wake some people up.
And they have effectively open the eyes of many to
serving the market demand. The extent of "serving"
can take many different forms.

Gary Gentile, AP, Washington Post.

We can see between the lines a compromise effect. You
do want to protect the originators property rights, limiting
the # of burns, yet still dealing with the "Fair Usage" issue.

But three key points brought up that just sent me spinning.....

"But movie download services such as Movielink, CinemaNow
and Amazon.com's Unbox haven't been able to use CSS
because studios fear widespread DVD burning could lead
to piracy."

What the hell does that mean? CSS is a locking system
to prevent widespread DVD burning. And let's all come
to grips on what fuels piracy - PROFIT. As long as the
price stays $30 or more, there is, will be and forever more
someone to push the envelope of legal and sell it cheaper. An
until you make it illegal for me too "purchase" pirated material,
this song plays on. Like we have said before, Pirates know
their is a demand for their service. Price drops to $10 game
over. Do you smell the air of greed here.

2nd. Kiosk - selling individual songs, finally. Artist can now
choose to have{which sometimes is costly}Single or not.
This way they just release all the tracks an consumers/fans
decide. Now if they are smart, this where the price increase
occurs. An if artist wake up, the so called "distribution"
channels just doubled. Each outlet will develop their OWN
vehicle "Kiosk", since your paying-per-track deploying
them on "other" devices should not be an issue.

3rd - Everyone needs to buy a NEW DVD Player or
install firmware an by new (pre-coded I bet) discs. Thanks,
just when we're about ready to make the plunge into
which NEW DVD Format - Nan will make the old
format more DRM protective. Was that not the reason
for Blu-Ray/HD DVD in the first place or were we
miss lend again. Studios are seriously looking at archived
material, once thought to be non-profitable, for an additional
new flow. This must be sending SONY over the edge. I'm
sure the cost plays a huge role here or is it by actually
making archived material on NEW formats you in turn "PAY"
SONY. US studios paying a Japanese company a type
of royalty to re-play their own material. GREED always
awakes Stupid decision's.