You’ve heard of disposable cameras! You’ve heard of disposable diapers! How about, Disposable movies? For this video to make any sense, I’m gonna
need you to imagine a world in which Netflix, Amazon Prime video, Disney+ (trying to future
proof here) and all those other streaming services don’t exist. It’s a desolate landscape, I know, but thankfully
video rental stores existed to help you through these trying times. And, well actually Netflix did exist at this
point but they were still only mailing DVDs to you. How quaint. But ya know what’s annoying about video
rental stores? You have to take the disc back to them. Or, mail it back. What a hassle! I mean, needing to go back to the store? And giving them the thing which I borrowed
back? How inconvenient! I mean, it’s not like I’m gonna just go
back and rent another thing. Now I have to go out of my way to return my
copy of Shrek 2. Eugh. But what if there were a way that I could
rent a movie, and not have to bring it back? Don’t you mean buy the movie? No! I mean, what if I could somehow bring home
a DVD which will only work for 2 days after I open it, and then it breaks itself! All the savings of renting with the convenience
of buying! I’ll take 600! This rather bizarre idea did actually happen. It wasn’t a huge success, and I’m gonna
argue that’s probably a good thing, but in the early 2000’s there was an idea to
put a clever spin [the PUNS] on optical disc technology. Some of you might be thinking of DIVX, an
earlier modification of DVD by Circuit City which was a more technical solution involving
special players that phoned in to a central server to verify whether any specific disc
could be played or not. You could then upgrade your disc at an additional
charge to be playable after the rental period, or even upgrade it to a so-called DIVX Silver
disc, at which point you effectively owned that title. Ain’t that some dystopian DRM right there? But we’re not talking about that. Instead, we’re talking about something else. After DIVX had proven itself a failure, a
little company called Flexplay Technologies decided to try that concept again and began
to market what they initially called EZ-Ds. These were completely compliant DVDs that
would work in any DVD player, but that were made with a chemical component that would
effectively destroy the disc after two days of being exposed to oxygen. The idea was that you could buy these discs
in a store for about the cost of a rental, and since they were sealed in airtight packaging, they
wouldn’t break down until you decided to watch it. You could then watch the film an unlimited
amount of times within 48 hours, after which point the disc would blacken and become unreadable. And of course I have one of these discs right
here. It almost certainly does not work but we will
try it just in case! That’s right, I haven’t opened this yet. We’re gonna do it together! I moved you a bit closer so we can do this
toge-- hmmm. What's that doing here? Anyway, let’s open the package. ♫ swanky music begins in background ♫
I’m using a knife like a responsible person and cutting towards me. So this is just very basic [music cuts] …. [music resumes]
So this is just very basic paper packaging in shrink wrap. [sensational shrink wrap struggles] Very user friendly. And inside we find a little package with some
information. And our disc. Mmmmm. This might possibly work, but we will see. This is really, I will say, you would need
scissors to open this .. agh .. or some sharp object like a utility knife. So it looks like a normal DVD except the back
of it is a very dark red color. This may work, which would be surprising but
we’ll find out. I can’t see the TV so we’re just gonna
see what happens. [strange whirring noise from the DVD player] It’s making really weird noises. I’m gonna guess it’s not working. It’s trying again. This is nerve wracking. I don’t think it’s working. I just noticed this “For best results, open
by April 2009” which is great because that was inside the shrinkwrap so there’s no
way you could really… well I suppose on the shelf it wouldn’t matter but if you took this home you better open at least this far to get a sense of when you need to watch this. We appear to be getting nowhere fast. This is attempt 2. It really sounds like it’s trying its best. Wait. Did it get somewhere? [more disc drive noises] I have to… I have to actually look at the screen. I can’t stand this. What’s very interesting to me is that the player
hasn’t given an error. It’s just continuously trying to play it. So it’s almost like it can see something,
but not enough to matter. Well, that was an expected disappointment. Since the disc is so old, oxygen has seeped
through its packaging and has already destroyed the disc. In fact, the discs only had a shelf life of
about a year. If we were in 2008 or whenever this disc was
made we would have seen a bright red disc. And it would have, you know, worked. Now, you might think that the red coloring
is the special compound which turns black. But it isn’t. Instead it’s a weirdly forward-thinking
countermeasure against them newfangled Blu-Ray players they’re talking about. See the black color isn’t actually black. Light of certain wavelenghts could pass through
it, much like how infrared light passes right through the “black” coloring of a PlayStation
disc. And one of those wavelengths that could pass
through this is the blue-violet found in the laser of a Blu-ray disc player. Coloring the disc itself red would block that
blue light, so even if someone could manage to read DVD-data using a blue laser (which,
for the record, isn’t very easy at all and is why Blu-Ray players have a red laser diode,
too for reading DVDs) their attempt would be foiled. Are you wondering why I keep calling this
black when it’s clearly a cherry-red? Well, to make filming easier I filmed the
written portion before I actually opened the disc. Yep, it was movie magic! Descriptions and images of these discs show
that they literally turn black like a Playstation disc, but this disc clearly hasn’t. This is why I thought there was a chance the
disc may have worked when I first opened it. Either its packaging was somehow able to prevent
the disc from turning completely black in the 11 years between its manufacture and today,
or describing it as “blackening” was simply hyperbole and in fact it just got darker. If the disc does turn completely black in
the coming days, I’ll let you know and provide some pictures in a pinned comment. Well, links to pictures but you know what
I mean. So let’s talk about what this disc was actually trying
to accomplish. When you or I go to a store and buy a DVD
or blu-ray disc, we’re not really buying the movie. Instead, we’re buying a specific license
to watch that content in a private setting for the rest of time. Or at least, for the life of the disc, video
tape, or whatever media contains it. That’s what the FBI is always warning you
about. You didn’t buy a license to show this in
theaters. You didn’t buy a license to share this on
YouTube. You bought one license to watch this one film
in your home for your own enjoyment. But, you can watch it over and over again. And once you buy it, you’ll never have to
buy it again. Unless of course you get tired of watching
it on VHS and want to upgrade to some newer format or whatever. The cost of making the packaging and the disc
itself is almost nothing. DVDs cost pennies to make, but the movie is
expensive because of the terms of the license you’re buying. If whoever the content owner is can only make
money from you once and then possibly never again, they’re gonna charge a lot for the
option to outright own the rights to private viewing indefinitely. But, if there’s a set time limit on your
enjoyment of the film, then the movie studio doesn’t have to charge nearly as much. If they have the opportunity to sell it to
you again down the road, they won’t mind if they only make a few bucks. So, what Flexplay, and DIVX before it, attempted
to do was to sell only temporary rights to a film, and thus movie studios would only
charge FlexPlay a couple bucks per disc, rather than 10 or 20. And, since DVDs are hilariously cheap to make,
FlexPlay could simply sell you these discs for the cost of a rental (about five dollars)
and all parties involved would make their buck. The advantage of Flexplay, of course, was
that you needn’t bother returning to the place you bought it. The disc would simply become unusable and
you could toss it out. Now, while this may seem like a pretty stupid idea --after all video rental stores already
existed so what’s the real advantage aside
from enabling even lazier habits-- it could have been pretty revolutionary. Flexplay wasn’t just trying to make a consumer’s
life easier. They were trying to enable any business to
easily get into the video rental market. Video stores like Blockbuster needed lots
of square footage of retail space to maintain their inventories, they needed to track rentals
and charge late fees, and in general their business was rather unique. A grocery store probably isn’t gonna want
to take on all those hassles just to make a few extra bucks. But, since Fle-- it’s back! How did… But since Flexplay didn’t require you to
return anything, stores could simply sell them like any other product. Any retail establishment, from grocery stores,
to gas stations, to office supply stores, to hardware stores could easily get into the
video rental market. Simply set up a Flexplay display, order some
movies to sell, and watch your profits soar! Except, of course, that didn’t really happen,
did it? Flexplay discs were first tested in 2003 with
a small handful of Disney titles and the test was a resounding failure. First of all, let’s be honest, this is a
weird product. You’d think that the failure of DIVX would
have been a warning that this ain’t gonna work, and even in 2003 Billboard was skeptical
of the product and thought it would create a lot of market confusion. They were pretty correct, as the test ran
for only a year before the product was pulled. A large part of why it failed was due to pressure
from environmental groups. Disposable DVDs don’t sound like a great
product to catch on. While it is of course possible to recycle
the discs, for the test run Flexplay didn’t seem to be that interested in figuring that
part out, and of course needing to return to the store where you bought it to recycle
the disc… kinda defeats the purpose. The convenience aspect sold both to the business
that sells them and the consumer that buys them is pretty much lost if the consumer is expected
to return, and the business has to handle the recycling. So what’s the point? Disney is likely who caused the end of the
trial, as environmental groups were pressuring them to stop this Flexplay nonsense. And they did, for rather obvious PR reasons. But, Flexplay would return with a vengeance
in 2008. They had somehow managed to get Paramount,
Warner Brothers, Starz, and New Line Cinema to agree to licensing deals, and they
also convinced Love’s Travel Centers, Hudson News, Travel Centers of America, and notably
Staples to sell their discs. Apparently they were trying to go after the
business traveler who wanted to rent a movie, but was too busy to return it. Or something like that. To try and alleviate concerns from the environmentally
minded, they partnered with a company that recycles “Technotrash” to provide recycling
bins at places that sold the discs (which again defeats the purpose) and they also would
allow you to print out a free shipping label to return the disc for recycling. Which again. Defeats the point. And now you’ve printed something. To ship it back. To be destroyed. Apparently Flexplay did offer free return
labels during the original trial run, but… Really, the whole thing did seem rather stupid. If you’re gonna mail it back, you might
as well use Netflix and the disc can then be enjoyed by dozens of people. Rather than one. If you have to return to the store, you might
as well go to a video store and rent it there. Or, you can just throw it out and be OK with
the waste of plastic. And then of course there’s this little company. Ah, yes. That one. The product that lets retail establishments
get into the video rental business without taking on any of the hassle. Which allows its customers to return their
rentals to any of the machines, which are purposely placed in front of everyday businesses
to maximize convenience. The product that costs a small fraction to
use compared to buying a Flexplay disc, with only a small convenience penalty, or if you
were of the mind to recycle your Flexplay disc, no convenience penalty at all. But I’m sure Flexplay will do just fine! Well it didn’t. At a cost of $4.99 to $5.99, the product didn’t
make sense at all. Remember that Netflix discs were only $10
a month at this point, and that was for an unlimited number of rentals. (well, unlimited
aside for the turnaround time of mailing it back). As long as you rented just 2 things in a month,
Netflix comes at the same cost or less of Flexplay. And of course, you could keep the disc for a
week and not… ya know find that it destroyed itself. Redbox rentals were still $1 per day, so if
you wanted to go that route, you could rent a movie for one fifth the cost of a Flexplay
title. And thanks to their positioning in front of
convenience and grocery stores, you would probably have a reason to go back and return
it, anyway. Plus, Redbox does give the retail establishment
a commision for letting them use the space for a machine. So regardless of how icky throw-away polycarbonate
frisbees may seem to you from a waste perspective, it also frankly just didn’t make sense. At
all. Flexplay was pretty much the worst possible
way to rent a movie at the time. If, perhaps, things went to their plans and
loads of bored business travelers stuck in airports decided to pop for a movie from Hudson
News, then maybe this would have worked. But, I just don’t think that was really
a viable market to begin with. If it was, you’d think Redbox would be in
airports, since you could just return the disc when you get home. But maybe they didn’t want to deal with
the logistics of discs routinely going cross country or something, I don’t know. Pretty much the one sole advantage that you
could say Flexplay legitimately had was that the discs would be brand new every time. You’d never have to worry about a scratched
rental disc refusing to play, and then the hassle of returning it and getting a refund. But, this concept was already tried with DIVX
and people didn’t like it at all. Yes, DIVX was a weird product that wasn’t
even compatible with DVD players so at least Flexplay had that going for it. But the resounding failure of DIVX was somehow
brushed off by those pushing Flexplay, and honestly they shoulda seen this coming. I’ll grant it’s clever, and I remembering
hearing about it and thinking it was pretty neat. But for a commodity like video rental, a neat
gimmick means a lot less than a practical, inexpensive rental. And that’s before we even get into the waste
aspect. Sure, the production and disposal of an individual
DVD probably has a teeny tiny environmental impact, but the Tragedy of the Commons means
that as more people do it, the worse it gets and possibly without realizing it. If Flexplay had become mainstream, then imagine
a world in which 70 million households were renting one movie per month. That’s over 800 million DVDs produced each
year in the US alone, all of which will be intentionally wasted if made by Flexplay. In 2010 Redbox rented over 500 million discs. According to this website I found, the average
disc is rented 15 times. So, those 500 million rentals were only made
of about 33 million discs. Redbox accounted for nearly half the rental
market around this time, so assuming similar numbers across the board, conventional DVD
rental would require about 66 million discs per year, vs. 1 billion Flexplay discs. Yikes. So I think it’s safe to say it’s a good
thing Flexplay kinda fizzled. Yes there are probably a few billion blank
DVD-Rs floating around that will never be used, but they weren’t meant to just be
tossed. Producing a DVD with a deliberately limited
lifespan seems pretty… well of poor taste. And I think that while we seem to live in
a convenience-driven economy, there is a line that seems rather crass. And I think Flexplay crossed it. Interestingly, a thought experiment has been
floating around wondering if the environmental impact of streaming services, with their vast
amount of hard drives and servers running 24/7 sucking up that sweet sweet electricity
might actually be worse for the Earth’s health than physical media. In many ways streaming services are the perfect
candidate for a Tragedy of the Commons scenario, because we can’t see the backbones that
make them work. But regardless, I think we can agree that
producing tons of single-use DVDs is definitely worse than simply renting them out the old
fashioned way. Before I close this video out, I’d like
to discuss the patent. The patent that I believe is the principle
one owned by Flexplay is incredible. Their patent was so broad that it covered basically any potential way to create a self-destructing disc. Here are just a few samplings: "In one embodiment... Another aspect of the invention... Alternatively, a timed destruction of the
data... They basically thought up as many ways to
achieve a self-destructing disc as they could, and wrapped them all up into an over-arching
patent. Pretty smart, actually. In fact, it can best be summed up in this
one paragraph: Another aspect of the invention is a composition... They even described a disc that would be chemically
altered from the light of the laser reading the disc, which could in theory limit the
disc to a certain number of plays, and not a specific timeframe. They really did cover all their bases, here. Too bad it was a product nobody asked for. As always, thank you to everyone who supports
this channel on Patreon, especially the fine folks you see scrolling up your screen. Contributions from individuals like you are
what make Technology Connections possible. If you’d like to make a pledge of your own
and get perks like early video access, occasional behind the scenes footage, and the inside
scoop on the latest projects, please check out my Patreon page. Thanks for your consideration, and I’ll
see you next time! ♫ temporarily smooth jazz ♫ I will be amazed if this works. And I hope it doesn’t because I already
recorded what I did earlier, so let’s… let’s try. ...was to sell only temporary rights to a film, and the… no. ...is pretty much lost if the consumer is respected to... Respected? Expected! ...is pretty much lost if the consumer is res…. (disappointed silence) Is expected. ...is very hard because. Ahh!! No!! That’s not the line. The…. dibbiybede And loads of bored business travelers stuck in… eugh. I’ve completely forgot how I wrote this
line. We appear to be getting nowhere fast...
See also: DIVX.
I remember these. Absolute marketing disaster. They were prone to glitches on first use, would sometimes fail in a matter of hours, often 90% of the way through the move, and were pretty expensive compared to rentals, which were already expensive.
Another flaw was most rental places gave you three or five days to rent (besides new releases) and it was common in those dark ages to watch the same movie three times in those five days.
Thank god that system tanked!
Honestly, all his videos are perfect mealtime videos.
Cool video!