Ok, complaining is one solution. Many times it's the best option for consumers. However producers like this guy should work with the owners of the technology and negotiate a better deal.
Get support from other independent producers, get a following, get some press, and eventually get your way.
Instead he chooses to just complain. That's just lazy.
> However producers like this guy should work with the owners of the technology and negotiate a better deal.
You really think an independent film producer, hell, even all independent film producers as a group, have any negotiating power with the Blu-Ray licensing people? Seriously? If anything, the owners are deeply in bed with the big studios, who have a vested interest in keeping anybody but themselves off the platform.
I'm not sure why negotiation with and appeasement of the Blu-Ray people would be that productive. Explaining to consumers why Blu-Ray, as a technology, sucks, and encouraging them to use something else -- which right now might be "stick with DVDs" -- so as not to give their money to Blu-Ray's owners, seems like perfectly a valid strategy, since it might result in something better than Blu-Ray down the road. Working with Blu-Ray won't do that.
Blu-Ray may be the "winner" of the HD format war, but they're not gaining traction very fast. If adoption can be slowed down enough -- if users can be convinced it's a shitty format run by a would-be cartel who want to crush independent cinema beneath punitive fees -- then it'll be that much easier for a new format to succeed.
Of course it's the economy more than anything that has slowed down Blu-Ray adoption, but I don't see how telling people about the weaknesses of the format and its backers is a bad thing. The more people who know about it, the better, and the greater demand they'll be for an alternative (whether it's USB sticks, SD cards, or some form of online distribution).
No, it's presumptuous. You made no mention of ongoing negotiation, and I assumed a post entitled "Blu-Ray Still Blows" would muddy up negotiations if they existed.
Since you're here, correct me. Are you working with the owners of the technology to get this solved for independent producers?
I am not going to "negotiate" with Sony, Panasonic, IBM, and the other three members of the consortium for a "better deal". The Copy Protection is baked into the spec and cannot be removed - that's already a deal breaker for me. The terrible fees on top of it for even utilizing the copy protection you can't even choose not to use make it even worse.
My tactic has been to release my work under open licenses (www.bbsdocumentary.com is one, www.getlamp.com is about to be), give presentations in which I discuss this situation, and write weblog entries about such, which, as you see, do garner attention.
I donate to the EFF and their occasional efforts to improve the situation on a legal basis.
I question the seriousness of this post if you think that it is possible to have 'reasonable' negotiations with the AACS, the MPAA, Sony, etc about their licensing policies.
Large companies/organizations usually dictate their licensing terms downwards. They only make exceptions if they view you as a large enough group to be talking on their level (i.e. a major movie studio).
Get support from other independent producers, get a following, get some press, and eventually get your way.
Instead he chooses to just complain. That's just lazy.