FYI - I never noticed a watermark on any releases from Lethal Hardcore but there is one on Anal Cumsumption, volume 3. It is in the upper right-hand corner of the screen. It wasn't a big deal to me but I know some people hate watermarks.
By the way, one compliant in the past about this series is the obvious fake anal cream pies farted into a glass. This volume is no different than the other two volumes.
Why? A company is trying to protect their product in what they see is the best way possible. How can a tiny icon on the top right hand corner of the video deter you from purchasing their product?
Read them. Passionate arguments on both sides. I don't care for them but it doesn't deter me from renting or buying DVDs that have them. Plus, if I do see a pirated clip on the net that's very hot, a watermark may help me narrow it down to the production company that made the clip. I think of it as free advertising.....
Strange, isn't the logo that's on a car basically free advertising? It identifies and advertises at the same time, right? Wouldn't a video watermark do the same thing?
I of course also hate watermarks, it really screws up the action and I know this because almost all clips from internet porn companies put watermarks on their clips and some of them even place them like in the middle of the scene or use a HUGE place on the bottom to place the URL of their website. Blacksonblondes and Zenaidaflava are one of the worst, they use these huge logos for their clips.
It's not the same. If you're interested in our objections to watermarks, you might want to read the threads Bill linked to.
Mandi from Pixie/Platinum asked the same thing, and my reply is still the same: Logos on cars and clothes do not impair the functionality of the object. There are even those that buy clothes specifically for the logo.
Visible watermarks in a movie obscure, however little, and do detract form the movie, IMO. Nobody (that I'm aware of) buys porn for the bragging rights of owning an Evil Angel/Wicked/Vivid DVD.
Note: AFAIK, Pixies are no longer putting watermarks on new or reauthored releases.
In the second thread that I linked to earlier, I answered this question when it was asked about logos on electronic equipment.
Here is that answer: Logos on the equipment are more the equivalent of the label on the physical DVD rather than something that actually impairs the proper usage of that product. A more appropriate analogy would be if my DVD player always displayed a "Panasonic" logo on the screen when it is in use. On the other side of the screen would be the "Toshiba" logo that the TV generates. At the same time, my speakers would be repetedly chanting "M&K" at a low volume intertwined by my receiver whispering "Denon" over and over.
It always gets in the way no matter how big it is and no matter where it's placed especially during close-ups. There are enough ways to fight pirates without having to use a watermark.
Ever told a car salesman that you'd buy it, if it just didn't have that dealer's logo sticker on it? :) Salesmen work on a commision. That sticker will be gone so fast that it will make your eyes blur. He's not going to let you walk over something that minor.
That's one thing that makes this different. The DVD buyer can't buy it without the ad.
I did exactly that. The dealer wanted to put a sticker for their particular dealership on the bumper of the car. I told him I'd buy the car, but only on the condition that that sticker was not attached to it. The sticker was gone just like that.
The Vouyer watermark on O-Ring Blowout kinda pissed me off. If you watch the dvd on your computer without the title-safe cropping of television it's like an inch into the screen--not just in the corner.
The DVD industry should protect their discs so people can't rip them and distribute them on the web. How hard is it to design a waterproof system for this?
A car though is more an individual case. The seller can feel his money about to walk.
With the watermarks on the DVDs though, it is more subtle. If _everybody_ immediately quit buying watermarked DVDs, then the reaction would be just as immediate as the car dealer getting rid of that sticker. But - - that won't happen. Too many people will keep buying them. As long as there are non-watermarked DVDs out there though, smart sellers will keep an eye on the sales. If they notice a difference, then it quickly becomes a money thing, and they will start weighing that difference to see if it is worth it. And now we are down to it (or back to it): "worth it" . Money talks.
The data must be able to be read off the DVD, for it to be played. This data is then sent to some other electronics that compose it into something we can use - video for our screen and audio for our speakers.
Won't it always be possible to take that data and send it to some other electronics? like a computer? running software that can just save it?
I know this is oversimplified. But isn't it the basics of what is happening when we play a DVD?
In other words, I don't see how ANY kind of protection can ever work, unless maybe it is done with hardware and somebody keeps the patent on that hardware secret. There could only be one manufacturer of said hardware - but that's a monopoly and a whole 'nuther kettle o' fish. At least this way, if somebody started selling the needed hardware, it would be a tangible item and the enforcement folks would be able to work against it a bit better.
They did. It was called Content Scrambling System (CSS). CSS is an encryption system. IT required a decryption key built into every DVD player. When a company would obtain license rights to build DVD players, part of the requirement to that license was to protect the decryption key.
Some manufacturer of DVD-ROM drives screwed up and didn't encrypt the decryption key. After a decryption key became known, hackers were able to reverse engineer the decryption process.
The rest is history.
Here's an article from Wired describing what led to the cracking of CSS.
One reason that movie studios may be more eager for High Definition DVD's is that both of the proposed formats will be using a different, much stronger encryption algorithm than CSS.
Macrovision claims to have done that with their Rip Guard DVD process. However, companies would actually have to pay for this technology.
It's much cheaper for a company like Lethal Hardcore (as well as others) to screw their honest customers by putting watermarks on their DVD's in order to persuade the dishonest people not to put their product on the web.
For my part, I will be attempting to make it less profitable for a company to watermark their DVD's by not buying them.
I just flat out refuse to buy anything with a watermark on it. As a matter of fact I stopped buying all Redlight District's products because I picked of two movies and was blind sided by water marks. The thing that pissed me off is there was no warning on the box cover or anything. I felt so pissed off I did not even bother to watch the two movies. $20. down the drain but I will never buy any Redlight crap again.
I know I'm coming in to this discussion late, but having just viewed a couple of recent Red Light District Releases, I want to join in the chorus decrying watermarks. Nothing is more distracting than seeing some corporate logo while you're trying to enjoy a video, whether it's on commercial TV or on porn flicks. I will not recommend any title which has a watermark.
Anyone knows if Redlight and PXP are still putting watermarks on their DVDs? I want to pick up 2 recent releases with Jaime Elle doing IR but I want to be sure about the watermark issue before I spend my $$.
Thanks for that information Bill. I know that Cum Swapping Sluts 8 had a watermark but the reviews here for Cum Swapping Sluts 9 don't mention whether there is a watermark or not. Since both 8 and 9 directed by David Luger, I'll now assume that Cum Swapping Sluts 9 has a watermark also. The 1st seven volumes of Cum Swapping Sluts are blissfully free of watermarks!
I would appreciate it if reviewers made a habit of mentioning if there is a watermark on a DVD. Even though some viewers don't mind watermarks, the presence of a watermark will ruin the movie completely for other viewers such as myself. My reviews will always mention whether there is a watermark. Of course, I will not knowingly volunteer to review a watermarked DVD since I won't enjoy the DVD and will not be able to give a fair review (in my opinion) for those who do not mind watermarks.
It watermark now but I think the next step will be adult companies using some kind of DRM for their DVD's just like a lot of adult internet companies do now with their movies.
Audrey Madison Interview
Posted - Mar 26 2005 : 7:46AM