[citation][nom]rosen380[/nom]I'm pretty sure the biggest benefit is that for $2 I can get legitimate 'access' to a 1080p version of 'The Pirates of the Caribbean' that I own on DVD without having to spend $15 on a bluRay disc.Similar to the Apple music thing, where you "upload" your mp3s and you get nice higher quality versions [unless your collection is already high quality-- mine isn't... when I ripped most of my MP3s disk space was still too expensive for that ][/citation]No, you have to read that part carefully. If you have the DVD version and you want DVD quality (presumably 480p standard def), it's $2. If you have the Blu-ray version and you want 1080p, it's $2. If you have the DVD, BUT you want your digital copy to be 1080p, you have to pay $5.
However, your point still stands. Instead of re-buying your movies in Blu-ray, you could get digital UV copies in 1080p for substantially less. Personally I like UV in concept quite a bit. It's simple enough that my parents could use it without any fuss. My only concern is what is going to happen to your UV movies in the long term? I'd need some kind of really solid reassurances to actually invest in any UV digital copies. Ideally UV would allow us to download and archive locally, for backup purposes and for conserving bandwidth in the long-term. I wouldn't even care if they were DRM'd, as long as the rights servers are maintained, you could still play any ones you've got local even if the main UV streaming servers were down/gone/you've hit your bandwidth caps.