Red Desert

[Nothing]

can someone explain - I thought catalog titles on Blu Ray aren't supposed to be Region coded? Aren't BFI in violation of the spec here?

[ellipsis7]

The BFI presumably have a licence only for UK/Ireland territory and thus are probably contractually obliged to code as Region B (as Criterion too, with their licences only for North America are obliged to code as Region A)....

[MichaelB]

The BFI presumably have a licence only for UK/Ireland territory and thus are probably contractually obliged to code as Region B (as Criterion too, with their licences only for North America are obliged to code as Region A)....

My understanding is that it is indeed a contractual obligation imposed on the BFI.

I've also noticed that Criterion has been much tougher on region coding in the past few years - previously, region 1 discs were very much the exception (generally their Japanese titles and a handful of others), but I don't think I've come across a recent one that wasn't region coded. (My Macbook, on which I generally try out new DVDs for the first time, is locked to region 2, so it's hard to miss these things!)

[Zazou dans le Metro]

(My Macbook, on which I generally try out new DVDs for the first time, is locked to region 2, so it's hard to miss these things!)

I too have a Macbook but have downloaded Region X which gives you unlimited ability to switch between regions...but possibly you knew that already?

[MichaelB]

unlimited ability to switch between regions...but possibly you knew that already?

Oh, does that work on Macbooks? I used to have it on my old Powerbook, but I understood it didn't work on models with drives that are region-locked at a hardware level.

But if it works for you, I'll give it a go!

(And I'll stick your DVD in the post today - sorry for not getting back to you earlier)

[Zazou dans le Metro]

unlimited ability to switch between regions...but possibly you knew that already?

Oh, does that work on Macbooks? I used to have it on my old Powerbook, but I understood it didn't work on models with drives that are region-locked at a hardware level.

But if it works for you, I'll give it a go!

I have a 17" Macbook Pro. I gave it to a mate who is a bit of a hacker/ techno-fiend and he tiddled around and now I have a DVD Region X application that I have to keep resetting and it works. However please don't ask for any more technical details as it's out of my league.

[Nothing]

The BFI presumably have a licence only for UK/Ireland territory and thus are probably contractually obliged to code as Region B (as Criterion too, with their licences only for North America are obliged to code as Region A)....

But Bluray isn't DVD. As I remember it, titles of a certain age aren't supposed to be region coded according to the original Bluray spec. This is one of the arguments the BluRay camp were using to back up their crappy format 12 months ago when the war was still on. I'm too lazy to dig up the supporting documentation, I'll admit.

Either way, there is a common moral argument out there that region coding of catalog titles is against the spirit of free trade, that the facility should only be used to protect the release schedules of new titles. The BFI can and should negotiate with rights holders on this matter. Warner doesn't region code their Bluray at all.

[MichaelB]

The BFI can and should negotiate with rights holders on this matter. Warner doesn't region code their Bluray at all.

That's because Warner generally owns its titles outright, which usually won't be the case with independent labels - so you're not comparing like with like.

Independent labels also have considerably less in the way of financial or other incentives to offer the rightsholder as a quid pro quo - simply saying "actually, we don't really fancy this region coding lark, would you mind awfully if we dropped the idea if we said please very nicely?" doesn't generally cut much ice! And neither do moral arguments or appeals to their better nature, however reasonable they might be.

Criterion would be a far better comparison - and from what I hear they're region-coding their Blu-rays as well.

[Forrest Taft]

This is the first release to make me really want to run out and get a BluRay player ... even though I guess I'd have to have it shipped from overseas, and wouldn't be able to play much else on it.

Or you could buy a regionfree player. The LG HDDVD/Blu-ray combo player for instance (LG BH100 or BH200).

[Nothing]

But Warner sets a precedent that the BFI can point to.

Honestly, it's a buyers market right now. If distributors were prepared to make this a deal-breaker, I'm sure we'd see a rapid shift. As I gather from the Criterion thread, MoC are going to attempt the Region Free route.

[MichaelB]

But Warner sets a precedent that the BFI can point to.

Again, you're not comparing like with like. Warner isn't licensing its titles to anyone else, so it matters not the merest iota whether they're region-coded or not as there's no international competition to speak of.

Sorry to play devil's advocate (because obviously I'm sympathetic to your position on a personal level), but none of your arguments are likely to carry much (if any) weight in an actual negotiation with a third party rightsholder if they're the kind of organisation that's minded to insist on region-coding in the first place.

Honestly, it's a buyers market right now. If distributors were prepared to make this a deal-breaker, I'm sure we'd see a rapid shift.

I hate to say it, but it's just as likely that distributors would insist to rightsholders that other territories region-code, so that "their" regions are protected - the "buyers market" argument cuts both ways, because a fresh format means fresh licensing deals, and so the rightsholder is likely to be more inclined to want to protect particular territories in advance - especially now that heavyweight arthouse players like Criterion are moving into Blu-ray.

I'm also not quite sure how you could "make this a deal-breaker" in an actual negotiation without effectively admitting that you're planning to market the disc outside the territory that you're actually licensing. Any suggestions as to how to get round this?

As I gather from the Criterion thread, MoC are going to attempt the Region Free route.

But MoC also region-codes its DVDs when compelled to do so, so how long they can keep this up depends on who they do business with.

[Nothing]

Again, you're not comparing like with like. Warner isn't licensing its titles to anyone else, so it matters not the merest iota whether they're region-coded or not as there's no international competition to speak of.

It's all about perception, about separating Blu-Ray from DVD. About making the argument that you suggest is near-impossible to make. In the DVD format, Region Coding was the industry standard. You can't say this about Blu-Ray, which is maybe 50/50 at present (maybe 20/80 for studio catalog titles and second runs). And then, with HD-DVD and VHS, there was no region coding at all - and region coding on DVD was a joke in any case - so there's really no need for it at all.

I hate to say it, but it's just as likely that distributors would insist to rightsholders that other territories region-code

I've never seen a distribution contract that make such specific stipulations about what another distributor must do in another territory. On the other hand, it's common practice to include a waiver to the effect that the licensor is unable to prevent parallel imports from other territories.

I'm also not quite sure how you could "make this a deal-breaker" in an actual negotiation without effectively admitting that you're planning to market the disc outside the territory that you're actually licensing. Any suggestions as to how to get round this?

A title like Red Desert is going to appeal to the sort of consumer who is most likely to own a Region A player, even if they live in the UK. I've always purchased most of my DVDs from the US and, if I were living in the UK and was in the market for a Blu-Ray player right now, R-A would be a no-brainer (well, if not for the fucking Red Desert disc...) This being the case, the BFI are actually preventing some UK customers from being able to make use of their product!

Then there is the negative perception around Region Coding. Maybe it'll work in my player, but what about my friend? What if I go on holiday in another region and want to watch by Red Desert disc? What if my laptop is set to R-A? Etc. Consumers don't appreciate it, so it's arguably going to hit their UK numbers just on that level.

Finally, international competition is a fundamental free market principal. If the BFI makes a better disc than, say, Criterion, then consumers from the US should be free to purchase their product instead. Or vice versa. They may have no rights to market the product outside the UK, they may have no rights to directly sell the product outside of the UK, but they do have a right for their product to be purchased by international customers in UK stores.

MoC also region-codes its DVDs when compelled to do so, so how long they can keep this up depends on who they do business with.

I think MoC are just being savvy to realise the practical difference between DVD and Blu-Ray region coding at this moment in time - unlike the BFI, who are living in the past.

As I say, it's a buyer's market right now, especially in the arthouse sector. Do you think MoC/Eureka could have afforded LA NOTTE ten years ago? If all the distributors insist, the licensors will crumble like a runny flap-jack.

[Gary Tooze]

...A title like Red Desert is going to appeal to the sort of consumer who is most likely to own a Region A player

I'm curious to know - just what are you basing this on?
Regards,
Gary

[pro-bassoonist]

It's all about perception, about separating Blu-Ray from DVD. About making the argument that you suggest is near-impossible to make. In the DVD format, Region Coding was the industry standard. You can't say this about Blu-Ray, which is maybe 50/50 at present (maybe 20/80 for studio catalog titles and second runs). And then, with HD-DVD and VHS, there was no region coding at all - and region coding on DVD was a joke in any case - so there's really no need for it at all.

Region-coding is an industry standard with Blu-ray as well.

The general trend at the moment is to have a majority of the content which the distributor-producer owns the rights for (Studio Canal's La Haine is the perfect example with a producer that is notably committed to region-coding) to be introduced as region-free. I believe that this would be a practice that will be corrected somewhat as the market balloons but then you have a much less restrictive of a region scheme with Blu-ray to begin with (read: the zones that overlap each other with Blu-ray are much larger than what they capture on SDVD, thus, making it much easier to import without any hassle).

As to your comment about HDDVD not having region-coding implemented on it, it is one of many reasons why the format was doomed from the get-go. Lack of region-coding would have eliminated a great deal of releases that region-coding makes possible, especially when it comes to sub-licensing parties. This is how the world outside of the US functions and this is how the majors generate a substantial amount of their residual revenue.

Best,
Dr.A

[MichaelB]

Just to make two things absolutely clear:

1) Everything I write in this thread represents my own personal opinion, and should absolutely not be interpreted as any particular company's policy;
2) I myself would dearly love region coding to be abolished worldwide (in fact, having been broadly region-free for nearly a decade, it's decidedly unnerving having to check before ordering a title from abroad that it will actually work in my Blu-ray player!).

But regardless of what I'd ideally like...

It's all about perception, about separating Blu-Ray from DVD. About making the argument that you suggest is near-impossible to make. In the DVD format, Region Coding was the industry standard. You can't say this about Blu-Ray, which is maybe 50/50 at present (maybe 20/80 for studio catalog titles and second runs). And then, with HD-DVD and VHS, there was no region coding at all - and region coding on DVD was a joke in any case - so there's really no need for it at all.

Well, there was region coding on VHS by default, in the form of PAL, SECAM and NTSC. Prior to the mid-1990s, getting round this involved either buying separate VCRs and televisions or expensive multistandard equipment, and of course importing was much less common - and by the time NTSC playback on PAL televisions became de rigueur, VHS was on the way out anyway. As for HD-DVD, it lost the format war. There were many reasons for this, but I'd be surprised if region coding didn't enter into the equation somewhere - for every Warner Brother there's a Fox.

I've never seen a distribution contract that make such specific stipulations about what another distributor must do in another territory.

Neither have I. But that doesn't mean that such issues aren't discussed at the negotiating stage, especially if one distributor knows that a rival in a different territory is chasing the same title at the same time (as is often the case, especially if a shiny new master has just become available). Since you've hinted several times both here and elsewhere that you either are or have been an industry insider, I shouldn't need to remind you what a minuscule world it is.

On the other hand, it's common practice to include a waiver to the effect that the licensor is unable to prevent parallel imports from other territories.

This is a slightly different issue, and essentially covers the distributor's arse against accusations of collusion with importers should their DVD get sold abroad in sufficient numbers to worry local distributors. But the mere fact that such clauses end up in contracts show how concerned rightsholders are about distributors being seen to move outside their specifically contracted territory - so it actually reinforces my argument rather than yours.

A title like Red Desert is going to appeal to the sort of consumer who is most likely to own a Region A player, even if they live in the UK. I've always purchased most of my DVDs from the US and, if I were living in the UK and was in the market for a Blu-Ray player right now, R-A would be a no-brainer (well, if not for the fucking Red Desert disc...) This being the case, the BFI are actually preventing some UK customers from being able to make use of their product!

No, these customers are preventing themselves from being able to make use of the product, by deliberately opting to be locked to a different region from the country in which they're based. And since they've decided to do this, their beef should be with distributors in the US (or wherever) for not releasing the title that they're after, since they've effectively (albeit virtually) relocated themselves to that territory. What you've essentially done is the same as buying an NTSC VCR twenty years ago and complaining that British distributors aren't catering for your needs.

Then there is the negative perception around Region Coding. Maybe it'll work in my player, but what about my friend? What if I go on holiday in another region and want to watch by Red Desert disc? What if my laptop is set to R-A? Etc. Consumers don't appreciate it, so it's arguably going to hit their UK numbers just on that level.

Finally, international competition is a fundamental free market principal. If the BFI makes a better disc than, say, Criterion, then consumers from the US should be free to purchase their product instead. Or vice versa. They may have no rights to market the product outside the UK, they may have no rights to directly sell the product outside of the UK, but they do have a right for their product to be purchased by international customers in UK stores.

Oh come on - do you seriously think that distributors like region coding? That they deliberately restrict their market out of sheer spite, and are prepared to take a financial hit because they despise their customers so much?

I think MoC are just being savvy to realise the practical difference between DVD and Blu-Ray region coding at this moment in time - unlike the BFI, who are living in the past.

Tell you what - shall we come back to this argument in a year's time and see if MoC has managed to remain exclusively region-free on Blu-ray, while still having a free run of all the titles that they're after?

As I say, it's a buyer's market right now, especially in the arthouse sector. Do you think MoC/Eureka could have afforded LA NOTTE ten years ago? If all the distributors insist, the licensors will crumble like a runny flap-jack.

I agree that the collective-action principle that you and Nick are advocating sounds great in theory - but it's stymied by the fact that it seems to be predicated on a simple us-and-them situation whereby distributors form one discrete group (which doesn't favour region coding) and rightsholders/sales agents form another (which does).

But while Nick is (I think) pretty much a pure distributor, many companies combine both roles (either directly or in different departments within the same organisation), so it's a racing certainty that not everyone will play ball. This being the case, those who don't go along with the plan will simply snap up the titles that haven't been grabbed by the more idealistic distributors, possibly at a lower price thanks to the perceived lack of demand. Which is why even the more idealistic distributors are unlikely to go along with it either if push comes to shove - not with the kind of margins they generally have to cope with.

And that's always going to be the bottom line in this business, and so-called moral arguments, absolutist statements of free-market principles and generalised jibes about "living in the past" aren't going to make a blind bit of difference. (Regardless, as I said, of my own personal feelings).

(Quick note to the mods - can this discussion be moved elsewhere? It's well worth having, but it's rather swamping the Red Desert thread!)

[Narshty]

This region coding fuss seems like the definition of a storm in a teacup. It's hard not to imagine within 24 months region-free Blu-ray players (either out of the box or via leaked codes) will be widely available, if not the norm. As sure as day follows night, there'll be not only interested parties reverse-engineering and cracking the players themselves, but if Blu-ray is to get the market foothold manufacturers and studios are after I'd have thought region-switchable players are an economic inevitability (and sooner rather than later).

[Nothing]

...A title like Red Desert is going to appeal to the sort of consumer who is most likely to own a Region A player

I'm curious to know - just what are you basing this on?
Regards, Gary

Sorry, slip of the keyboard, I should have said "more likely".

Region-coding is an industry standard with Blu-ray as well.

Not for catalog / second pressings. Even Fox and Disney make a lot of their catalog titles region free.

Lack of region-coding would have eliminated a great deal of releases that region-coding makes possible

Ah come on, you're over doing it. Studio Canal were in the HD-DVD camp until Warner sold out. Regon Coding on DVD is unenforcable/meaningless, so hardly "how the majors generate a substantial amount of their residual revenue".

This is a slightly different issue, and essentially covers the distributor's arse against accusations of collusion with importers should their DVD get sold abroad in sufficient numbers to worry local distributors.

It's still an admission that the licensor does not and should not have control over parallel imports.

Tell you what - shall we come back to this argument in a year's time and see if MoC has managed to remain exclusively region-free on Blu-ray

In essence, yes. But their position would be greatly enhanced if BFI (and AE, New Wave, etc) were to join in. Because...

those who don't go along with the plan will simply snap up the titles that haven't been grabbed by the more idealistic distributors, possibly at a lower price thanks to the perceived lack of demand.

...this is what the licensors don't want. Prices and competition have gone through the floor as it is and now with the financial crisis...

But yeah, good luck to Nick. We'll see what happens.

[ellipsis7]

The rights holders of RED DESERT presumably would hope to licence it also to North America for BluRay/DVD (Criterion?) if they've not done already, and they want to protect this position...

Majors like Warner, Fox and Disney can afford to leave their Blu-Rays region free for if you buy the same disc in USA or Ireland/UK or anywhere else for that matter it is still a Warner/Fox/Disney Blu-Ray and the money goes straight into their coffers whatever way you approach it... That's why so many of their European DVD releases often have something like 20 to 30 language options for their subtitles (and indeed menus) - economics of scale, cover a multitude of territories with the same basic product...

[MichaelB]

I'm actually rather flattered that Nothing has blatantly ignored most of the spanners I've been inserting in the works of his globalised fantasy, because that in itself speaks volumes.

But since he's continuing to peddle the scenario whereby distributors all band together in a massive group hug and vow to bring down the evil licensors, I'm just going to have to reiterate the point I made that many companies are both distributors AND licensors and therefore have interests in both sides of the argument.

To emphasise this, here's a genuine example of an international distribution deal. Obviously, commercial confidence means that I can't identify the title (though it doesn't really matter what it is), and I've obviously simplified the negotiations considerably, but this is the basic scenario: the producer of a certain film wakes up one morning to discover that all the existing distribution deals have expired and that the rights have reverted back to him. He approaches a large film company (Company A) with interests in both distribution and sales to propose a brand new restoration and DVD/Blu-ray release.

Company A does a bit of number-crunching and works out that the cost of said restoration is likely to be significantly more than can realistically be recouped in their domestic market (this is a title with genuine but limited arthouse/cult appeal). So they tell the producer "OK, we'll take this on provided we can also become the world sales agent and cream off our costs upfront from licensing deals outside our territory".

Company A also works out that they'd need at least two distribution deals in place before they can afford to greenlight the restoration. So they contact two friendly distributors in the US (Company B) and mainland Europe (Company C) and ask if they're interested. They are, but the snag is that they need to make a firm commitment to take on the film before the restoration can be carried out - in other words, they're effectively buying sight unseen. So they negotiate a lower rate because of the risk they're taking.

Company A says that's fine, but replies that because they're taking the biggest financial risk on the project, they want to have a six-month head start on a DVD release. Company B is cool with that, but insists that said release be region-coded and that Company A makes no attempt at marketing outside its own territory. Company A in turn says that Company B's release must also be also region-coded, because although they're coming out second, they'll have time to examine Company A's release and possibly improve upon it by adding more enticing extras.

Company C is in the same region as Company A, so the deal there is that all menus and booklets are in a language other than English, and that the film itself plays with forced subtitles - again, the aim being to restrict the film to Company C's own market as much as is possible. And of course Company C in turn asks Company A not to cater for its particular language group. Everyone's now negotiated the advantage they're after, minimised their upfront risk as much as is feasible, and the various deals can go ahead.

And that's how it works in the real world - or at least the world outside huge multinational corporations like Warner Bros who can afford not to region-code because it doesn't affect their bottom line.

[yoshimori]

I'm puzzled that the US amazon.com is listing the BFI Red Desert for sale with no indication that it won't be playable on American players. ???

[MichaelB]

I'm puzzled that the US amazon.com is listing the BFI Red Desert for sale with no indication that it won't be playable on American players.

I've tried to fix it as much as possible, but Amazon doesn't seem to recognise 'Region B' - so I've switched it to Region 2. Thanks for the tip-off - if Amazon haven't updated the listing by Monday, I'll get the relevant BFI department onto it.

[Awesome Welles]

Red Desert (1946) [Blu-ray]

They seem to have more than one thing wrong. Are they allowed to list this on the US site? They don't list Criterions on the UK except from marketplace sellers.

[Nothing]

I'm just going to have to reiterate the point I made that many companies are both distributors AND licensors and therefore have interests in both sides of the argument.

In some instances, but there is no such conflict of interest in regards to the BFI/Red Desert Blu-Ray (or BFI/Salo Blu-Ray).

And that's how it works in the real world - or at least the world outside huge multinational corporations like Warner Bros who can afford not to region-code because it doesn't affect their bottom line.

In the real world, Blu-Ray sales make up a tiny proportion of the market share and, on DVD, region choding is utterly meaningless. So if these companies really are relying on RC to protect their bottom line they're not going to last very long.

Yes, of course, there are many licensors and licensees who nevertheless insist on Region Coding, but a rational case (and insistence) can be made against this as Nick's stance demonstrates. And the BFI should follow suit.

[MichaelB]

In some instances, but there is no such conflict of interest in regards to the BFI/Red Desert Blu-Ray (or BFI/Salo Blu-Ray).

You're forgetting the fact that both releases contain proprietary extras, which can be licensed in turn to other distributors.

And since the question of extras has come up, I might as well expand on the example I quoted in my previous post, as the real situation was rather more complicated than I originally made out.

While Company B planned to license all its extras from Company A (which either created them outright or could pull them off the shelf), Company C had an exclusive extra of its own that it was prepared to offer Company A in a straight swap for one of Company A's in-house extras. Company C then got in touch with Company B and did a deal for the same extra, for which Company B was prepared to pay, as they wanted to make sure their release had all of Company A's extras.

In other words, both Company A and Company C ended up combining distributor/licensor roles - and Company B might well have done too if they hadn't chosen to rely on the extras that Company A put together.

True, some releases are more straightforward than that, in that the distributor licenses everything from a single source, and it really is the one-way process that you're making out. But this doesn't apply to any of the examples we've been discussing, where a scenario along the lines I quoted above is far more likely to apply.

Or indeed a vastly more convoluted one - one of my projects involved licensing 33 video items from twelve separate rightsholders based in five different countries, and one was in turn sold back to the original rightsholder after I created an English-friendly version. Just you try negotiating all that lot while avoiding a commitment to region-code along the way - it only takes one of the twelve to insist, and you're faced with the unenviable choice between region-coding or dropping something you've set your heart on. Some of the rightsholders were small, independent and malleable, but others were big multinational corporations - and with those, the "rational case (and insistence)" you're advocating is a complete waste of time: they couldn't have cared less if the deal fell through.

In the real world, Blu-Ray sales make up a tiny proportion of the market share and, on DVD, region choding is utterly meaningless. So if these companies really are relying on RC to protect their bottom line they're not going to last very long.

Region coding is utterly meaningless with some groups, but not others. For instance, the average American DVD purchaser isn't multi-region, and even quite a few US-based posters here aren't either. And you wouldn't be so exercised about this particular case if Blu-ray region coding wasn't a fair bit more effective.

And just to flip your argument on its head, it's precisely because Blu-ray sales make up a tiny proportion of the market share that licensors are keen on region coding - the last thing they want is for a title to be released in one territory and everyone to import the disc before they've had a chance to conclude a deal with distributors elsewhere.

(Simultaneous releases generally aren't a viable option, as each company will have its own schedule tailored to its own particular market - quite aside from situations like the one I mentioned above where they're deliberately staggered).

Yes, of course, there are many licensors and licensees who nevertheless insist on Region Coding, but a rational case (and insistence) can be made against this as Nick's stance demonstrates. And the BFI should follow suit.

As I said before, there's little point discussing "Nick's stance" until we've had a chance to see if it's borne any fruit. You know as well as I do that a great many MoC DVDs ended up being region-coded, so I'll be very surprised indeed if he manages to keep his Blu-ray line-up region-free.

And you still seem to be ignoring the main point I was making in my previous post, which is that these deals usually aren't a simple two-party us-against-them arrangement: they often involve several companies haggling over the master. Given the significantly higher manufacturing costs of Blu-ray discs, from the HD transfer through to the authoring and encoding, coupled with the significantly smaller market (at least for now), it's likely that we'll see a greater number of these co-production deals - and region coding will be an inescapable part of the equation. It's not the only bargaining tool in the armoury, but it's a pretty convenient one, especially since it appears to be a lot more effective with Blu-ray releases.

It's also worth noting that I've had a project in limbo for a good couple of years because I can't find anyone prepared to go halves on the cost of an HD transfer and restoration (it's a niche title, to put it mildly). Do you seriously think I'm going to make region-coding a deal-breaker if someone finally offers to come up with the funds?

[Nothing]

You're forgetting the fact that both releases contain proprietory extras, which can be licensed in turn to other distributors.... etc... these deals usually aren't a simple two-party us-against-them arrangement

No amount of detail can correct the flawed assumption that region coding is essential to the successful exploitation of the rights by these separate distributors in their individual territories. As you've pointed out, there are some licensees who insist on region coding, just as there are non-Hollywood licensors who were quite happy to release region-free material on HD-DVD. There's no exact logic to it, it's not really about the interests of one party against another but, rather, about enlightened companies making an effort to promote a pro-consumer understanding of the situation. Nick, as far as we know, is intending to do this, whereas the BFI have failed to do so and it now seems you want to spin this any way you can to justify that position.

I don't want to bang on, but it is not an insignificant move by the BFI here: these Blu-Rays set a precendent, being amongst the first region coded catalog titles on Blu Ray anywhere in the world. It makes it easier for Criterion to region code next month (a decision they have not yet confirmed) and you say "let's see what happens with Nick", but you have not done anything to aid his cause, in fact quite the opposite.

Some more arguments against region coding, to add to those put forward previously:

1/ Surely it would be even more cost effective for the parties in the negotiations you describe above to wait until all the extras are ready and then create a single DVD with multiple language options, dramatically reducing their encoding, mastering and manufacturing costs. Pan-European DVD production is quite a frequent occurance already, not only from major studios, and it doesn't seem to hit the bottom lines of the companies involved in anything but a positive way. As long as the product is of identical or similar quality, and as long as the pricing remains competitive, there is no reason for consumers to increase their shipping costs / carbon footprint / lead time by importing. In this scenario, it would also be easier to co-ordinate the release schedules.

2/ If you stick with the notion of individual masterings / release dates for whatever reason, it is stilll arguable that effective region coding is going to limit the profits of the licensees in both territories and, by default, the amount of money that feeds back to the licensor. Let's say that a region-free Red Desert from the BFI is bought by everyone in the world who is in the market for a Red Desert Blu-Ray - that immediately means a hell of a lot more money for the BFI, money that will be passed on to the licensor, either as a receipts, or in terms of the sort of MG they can demand next time around. And then let's say that, a year later, Criterion releases a region-free disc with different extras and/or improved transfer: the same group of international consumers are likely to repurchase the improved version of the disc as well and so you've created a double-dip and created more profits all round.

But, of course, this is not really how it works. The majority view importation as a hassle, what with shipping charges, waiting times and possible customs duties. They'd rather wander down to their local HMV and grab whatever is on the shelf in the 'sale' section. How else would Tartan have gotten away with a UK DVD of A Ma Soeur! that censors the entire climax to the film? And, of course, there is no RC on books or CDs or anything else, but this has never caused a problem.

4/ Where music (and, increasingly, film) distributors do have a problem is with internet piracy. RC encourages piracy: if consumers can't play the official release without importing expensive new hardware, they're far more likely to download a torrent rip with the RC removed.

Region coding is utterly meaningless with some groups, but not others. For instance, the average American DVD purchaser isn't multi-region, and even quite a few US-based posters here aren't either.

It isn't region-coding that hinders US DVD purchasers but, rather, NTSC-PAL standards conversion. Obviously, this isn't a problem on Blu-Ray - an argument you could use in support of stronger RC, but this is to argue for American protectionism. In any case, inherent nationalism means that most Americans are even less likely to import goods from 'yer'rup' on principal.