What is Digg?139 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+42I opened an account in about 1998. I used it to rent three movies and then never used it again. Years later (in 2003), BlockBuster started sending me notices about enormous fines I owed for past due movies to the tune of a couple thousand dollars.
I called them up and took issue with it, saying that I had not stepped foot in their stores in almost five years. Further, it was my understanding that you had to PAY each year to remain a member of BlockBuster and I had done no such thing.
After much debate, it turned out that another of my family members who has a first name starting with the same letter as mine (an 'S') rented movies frequently. The people working at BlockBuster were so careless that when they would just pick the first entry that showed up as "S. Lastname" rather than making sure it was the CORRECT person. And then when they returned the movies, they were not always returned under the same account they were checked out on.
Sloppy. Very ***** sloppy. I wish I had never even rented those three movies to begin with, because even one dollar given to BlockBuster for anything is sickening. Plus, I like getting my movies unedited by a bunch of crazy family values censoring nuts. - Doggpound, on 10/12/2007, -2/+34This just proves how stupid out patent system is when you can patent the idea of sending DVD's in the mail
- kevinrose, on 10/12/2007, -22/+50Oh yes, def going to talk about this on diggnation - this so rocks. I've lost hundreds to blockbuster in late fees.
- rm999, on 10/12/2007, -3/+20I don't like how netflix thinks they own the concept of no late fees. I hate blockbuster as much as the next man (4 dollar rentals - go to hell!), but I think competition is a great thing.
- Quiescence, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15People wouldn't wait for porn for 2 days with lots of online porn sites available..
- chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14So BlockBuster is at fault fo you being lazy?
- JustinGN, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14@mrassman
They got rid of late fees, but then replaced it with some system where if it wasn't returned within a certain period of time they automatically sold it to you. If it wasn't returned within 30 days after that, they charged your credit/debit card on file the full amount, less rental fee. - carebearwarrior, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13It's funny because a few years ago, Blockbuster had the opportunity to purchase NetFlix. Oh how the mighty have fallen.
- drawkbox, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15I guess this means trouble in their model... Blockbuster must be gaining immensly for them to pull this. Would only be in my bag of "in case ***** happens" tricks if I was Netflix. Trouble ahead? I do not like this at all, how about take off a few dollars and advertise to win customers... This is bad, or the dumbest move Netflix could make.
- Stillbored, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14Dude, Justingn, if you're not able to return a ***** video in 37 days (and that's not counting the time that you actually *pay* for), you deserve to pay for the damn thing.
Trust me, it's better to pay $20 for a DVD after 37 days than to pay a whole crapload of late fees. - osbjmg, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14Blockbuster's only chance is to continue online. If they are kicked out of the online rental arena, they will surely fold. Netflix obviously wants this to happen. I like netflix, but I don't like anti-competitive behavior :(
- cius, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I'm with doggpound on this one. It's ***** stupid that they can patent the idea of renting movies through the mail. This doesn't foster a competitive atmosphere, it destroys it. When an entire industry picks up on a "best practice" that's a good thing. It then means that the players in that indrustry will have to start innovating even further in order to differentiate themselves. If people really expect to make it big by a single invention, then they need to get real. People try to say that not protecting ideas would stifle innovation, as people would not invent if they knew that competitors could steal their ideas. Well, what do you think giving an inventor a permanent monopoly on a product is gonna do? If they get rich, good for them, by why invent when you've got a cash cow just sitting there reaping in the profits? Where does the innovation go then? Temporary monopolies, okay, you gotta redeem you R&D costs somehow, thats cool. But our copyright and patent systems are rapidly heading toward granting absolute monopolies and that worries me. If I were the judge on this, I'd spank NetFlix on the hand for wasting my time and tell them to suck it up and find a way to compete properly. Do some innovating.
- stonedgeek, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I hate Blockbuster and I would usually side with the smaller company in these kind of legal fights, but I have no respect for netflix in this case. Patent laws suck.
- perogi21, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@stillbored
I agree that paying 20$ for a late DVD is acceptable but what they really charge you for the movie is around 80+$ depending on the movie. My old roommate had that happen to him. - filovirus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Netflix only lowered their prices to compete. They did not do it out of a sense of love and charity. Thank Blockbuster.
When I return movies to Netflix they are always checked in the next day. I get new releases every Tuesday or Wednesday. My service with Netflix is great. Now, if they would only buy out Gamefly so my games don't have to go all the way to California to be checked in. Gamefly, are you reading? You are too slow to be worth the price. - TheRepublic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Yes there is, It's called Wanted List and it was featured on Wired Magazine a couple of months ago, started by 2 young Asian entrepreneurs in California.
- scruffles, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Blockbuster isn't going to fold if they loose their online business. It's competing against netflix that's dragging the company down (both their mail service and their 'no late fees' program). Rather than going broke trying to keep 10% of their customers that prefer online rentals, they should try to find more ways to dominate the 'in person' sale. Netflix shouldn't have bothered them nearly as much as McDonald's red box. This lawsuit might just save Blockbuster from its own bad management.
- MediaShipper, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10Yeah why now? Why not a couple years ago?
- aggieandrew, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5How do companies get pantents for this stuff. It's just so stupid. Can you imagine if this was done in other industries?
"Method of selecting, customizing, and purchasing a computer on a website."
Heck, I should even patent some of my teaching practices:
"Preparing printed notes for students that follow-along with instructor notes on an over-head projector, and giving a short assessment over the covered material the next day."
I just think we need major reform in our pantent system. Something like what Netflix does should not be pantentable. It means they can shut-down ANY COMPETITION. - OperatorNo9, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I agree with you that a subscription streaming service is the best of all possible worlds for many customers--sort of like Yahoo! music but with HD movies. But this model has many pitfalls the least of which is DRM. The worst of which is profitability. Think about what it is you're asking. For your $20 per month, they would have to pay the MPAA, sorry, MAFIAA, licensing fees for each movie, upkeep on a farm of some unGodly servers, and a handful of pipes fat enough to download an elephant. In order for them to only charge you $20 per month, they would have to sign up an army of bleeding edge consumers the size of which in in questionable existence.
I also think your playing up the "hassle" of using a service like NetFlix. Keep disc in sleeve until viewing. Replace after. Keep a spare NetFlix envelope somewhere. Lots of plans. Affordable. Most discs play well. Its a surprisingly good service...save the throttling issue. - MasterDwarf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3That's what the Interenet is for!!
- SoccerBoy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3RTFA:
"A second patent issued Tuesday to Netflix apparently triggered the lawsuit. Netflix believes the additional patent covers an even wider range of automated interaction with its customers." - chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3How about this - BlockBuster should sue Netflix for infringing on their business model of "taking money from people for renting movies."
- Flashman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3HOW DO YOU PATENT A BUSINESS PRACTICE?!!
"Excuse me, I'm suing you because I hold a patent on the use of spreadsheets to organise a corporation's finances." - sagenumen, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5It's not a matter of them giving you 37 days to return a movie. The fact is that they tell you one thing and do another. With Netflix, there is truly no late fee. I've had movies arrive while I was out of the country and by the time I returned and actually watched the darn things, it was over a month. Late fee? Zero.
I live in NJ and Blockbuster isn't allowed to advertise their "No late fees" because it's just not true. It is false advertising. Basically, they are just giving you extended late fees with even larger penalties for returning the movies late. - JustinGN, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Problem is, if Netflix wins this, then they could stretch the verdict to encompass other services like Gamefly and Red Octance, especially if NetFlix breaks into games as well. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see Blockbuster (Now known as Walletbuster?) go the way of the dodo bird, but this suit /could/ be seen as a monopoly attempt or monopolistic competition by Netflix.
I'm on the fence for this one. - INHUMANITY, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well this story reminded me to sign up for another 30 free day trial. This is my fourth membership and I haven't paid a penny for just over four months.
Unethical? Absolutely! Do I feel guilty? Absolutely not!
Thank you Blockbuster! :) - diecastbeatdown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3the way things are going it will take about 5-10 years before there is a reasonable streaming service online.
ma and pa rental stores were great back 15-20 years ago, but there are just too many movies out now and an online service such as netflix with huge warehouses is able to supply all those movies and provide an easy to use interface for check-out. blockbuster, hollywood and any other rental store can't compare, again there are just too many movies out there for a single walk-in type shop to hold.
blockbuster has the worst queue system and their online shop is almost unbearable to navigate. i had their service for about 2 months and the only way i can see someone preferring blockbuster online over netflix is that they just don't want to try new things and/or are loyal longtime blockbuster users.
i've had netflix for 3 years now, love it. it continually gets better. - hypercube33, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"a sheep in wools clothing." Thats all I'll say...
- chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3People complaining about Blockbuster late fees need to check themselves.
a) Blockbuster does not have a recurring monthly fee at the store level (it's free to join)
b) You have 2 weeks to return it scott-free
c) If you don't return it, they charge you the price of the movie, but you can still return it within 30 days from the rental and only pay like a $2 fee
So you're telling me that you can't return a movie within 30 day - further proof of Generation E(ntitlement) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8You know, it wasn't that long ago when there were mom and pop movie rental shops all over the place. You could rent movies at Safeway and Albertsons. Hell, even the little korean convenience store next door with the out of date products that expired their sell-by date 15 years earlier rented movies.
Now there's really just Hollywood, Blockbuster and Netflix.
I found even Netflix to be a hassle. Always having to make sure you keep all the little sleeves and discs together and rotating them quickly so you don't waste your money because you were lazy for a couple days. Not to mention the whole "timeshifting" thing where they stagger your movies to keep you from getting newer movies as fast as you should be allowed to.
But I tell you, as soon as someone figures out a way to give you all the movies you want per month via download or streaming, I am all over that. I won't pay per-movie, but I'd pay $20 or so to watch all the movies I could ever want per month. Especially if they were streamed in high enough quality that i could enjoy them on my 30" display. - PhaseDMA, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2doggpound - The lawsuit has nothing to do with sending DVDs through the mail. It has to do how the queue is used, and renting the DVD for a unlimited amount of time.
But you would know that if you read the article. - bbrosemer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You all have no idea what the patent claims, if anyone here knew how to read a patent or where to search for one they would know that NetFlix DID NOT patent the renting of DVD's through the mail what they did patent was essentially these claims, To the Renting of Movies through the use of a home computer, and having a max limit for these rentals; If blockbuster were to use a telephone or mail only service this would be perfectly legal in terms of patent infringement. However, Blockbuster did not take these measures. For all you skeptics here is the patent : http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/search-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=ptxt&s1=netflix&OS=netflix&RS=netflix
- AdamCo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I've had no problems with my Blockbuster online account. I get my movies quick. They have gotten better about having new movies in stock too. If I have a movie on my list that isn't out yet, they have been sending it to me the day before it comes out and it will be at my house the day the movie comes out, I like that. I hear people complaining about netflix when it comes to getting new releases. I haven't tried netflix, but I don't plan on switching from blockbuster. Especially since I get a couple free movie or game rental coupons a month for in store. Plus, I have got a couple free previously viewed DVDs from blockbuster with free coupons they sent me for using blockbuster online. I am happy with them.
- yensed, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Netflix knows the future isnt snail mail renting..
- buckykatt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I wonder if Netflix is suing now because of talk that Amazon might join the game. A precedent against Blockbuster might help them limit what Amazon can do.
- noamsml, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Suing competition out of buisness is one of the core definitions of evil.
- veloscaper, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The reason why this showed up today and is happening now is Netflix just got issued a new patent (issued April 4th) and the claims pretty much cover the idea of someone using a computer to select movies to rent that are then sent to them. Additional claims cover the movie queue and the ability for a customer to move titles up and down the queue.
The unlimited time with late fees might have been in some other claims but I just did a quick read of it. - elamr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Is this Netflix attempt at a "Mortal Kombat style" finishing move? Blockbuster is financially stunned so Netflix is going to attempt the legal equivalent to a spine dismemberment.
- robusteza, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2is there an online/mail order porn rental service yet? i always thought that would make someone an instant millionaire.
- chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That's the point - that is not an "invention." It is simply maintaining a list, nothing more, nothing less. Maybe anyone who has put out an instruction booklet should do the same thing - afterall, once you complete step one, you get to move onto step two and so on and so forth. It's like a kid giving a parent a Christmas list. They may want toy #1 so the parent gets it. Then the parent moves down the list and sees that toy #2 is sold out (similar to Netflix not having a movie in stock) so they move onto toy #3.
It's as rediculous as companies getting patents on proteins they discover (and I work in the pharmaceutical industry). The protein should not be patentable, only drugs you invent that affect that protein. Netflix has invented NOTHING. - swaxhog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I stopped using a mail in rental service, Zip.ca in my case, and went back to brick and mortar. The big thing around here is these new 24 hour fully automated rental outlets. Very cool set up. Movies are $1.29 to rent compared to $5 at the monopoly stores. Browse online, reserve, and go pick up. No waiting or guessing what movie might show up or waiting weeks for a new release.
- Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeesh, how many Congressmen do we have to buy to get some patent reform going?
- masonreloaded, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The issue isn't that people generally want to keep movies for longer than 30 days, it's the fact that Blockbuster say "NO LATE FEES" - which is just false. You say it yourself: there is a $2 fee if you dont return the movie within 2 weeks (actually 9 days for new releases, at least at my store) - what do you call that if it isn't a "late fee"?
If their advertising slogan was "KEEP IT LONGER" or something then fine, but they are comitting one of the worst cases of false advertising ever... - mechengr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You have to look at the patent claims not the abstract. The only way to violate a patent is if your product/process can be viewed the same as one of the claims. In order to get around it, you just have to come up with something just a little bit different that changes what the claim says.
- ultimate_ed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2For me, that's what makes Blockbuster the better deal. I started with Netflix, but switched to Blockbuster when they started up becuase they were cheaper and I got two in store rentals a month on top of the three out at a time. That flexibility is something Netflix just can't offer.
I've never had any trouble with Blockbuster, either online or in the stores. I would have to say that, if Netflix does have a patent, it ought to be thrown out as they've taken too long to try and make a claim against Blockbuster. Patents have to be defended to be enforcable. If Netflix really thought they had a claim, they should have filed from the moment Blockbuster went online. I certainly don't remember them suing Wal-Mart when they tried their online rental business. - noGoodNamesLeft, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That's funny, I kept reading that people were complaining about Blockbuster because *their advertising was misleading*.
If someone advertises something without making the snags clear, and people take them up on it, they have the right to bitch. Nothing to do with "entitlement". - thedazman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This is ridiculous. The basic idea of the lawsuit doesn't even make sense. If it we're true, McDonald's could patent selling food to cars that drive up next to the restaurant, Coca Cola could patent selling soda in vending machines, and Apple could patent selling songs on line. That's just crap.
- SoccerBoy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I hate Blockbuster. I returned a movie several years ago to one of their stores. About 6 months late I received a thing in the mail informing me that I must return the movie (that I already returned), or they would sue me.
I called up the store and the manager said it was too late and it was out of their hands. I asked if they could check and see if the movie I returned was their or not. The person on the phone said that I needed to deal with the Blockbusters head office and whatnot.
So I traveled three hours (I had moved away) to go back to the store I dropped the movie off at. I walked in went to find my movie (Bockbuster was kind enough to include their serial number for me), found my movie. I then went to the front count asked for the manager and showed him the movie that Blockbuster wanted to sue me over. He then accused me of bringing the movie into the store.
Just then a kid I went to high school with walks out of the back room. He was a manager in training. He started to help and discovered that the movie had been rented out to other customers, while the movie was "missing".
The manager then jumps back in and decides he needs to kick me out of the store.
So, the head office offered me free rentals for a year for all me problems. I declined, and haven't been in a store since, nor will I ever. - chrstphrbrwn, on 04/15/2009, -1/+3There are TONS of online porno rental services. A friend and I tried them out a couple of years ago. Their inventory and service sucks. Nothing is instock and you have to wait forever and a day for anything to arrive or process to return. Seems places like SugarDVD (sic) have the right idea to emulate the rental model, but just don't have the supply chain to implement the model correctly. On top of that, these companies cannot ship to many states (see: Teh South) due to strange and ancient blue laws that allow you to purchase porno mags, but not ship porn across state lines.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 138 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is