I read this that if you don't care and/or want a digital copy of your BR then you'll be just fine?

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6664863.html

You get to buy a new player if you want to use the feature. Profile 2.1? 3.0? Whatever. I don't even use BD-Live as-is because its clunky and slow.

I guess this means that the new players that will enable this feature will function as both a reader and a writer of discs and come with 50 GB on onboard memory for caching content to be burned?

Something tells me that for the PS3, there will be a new add-on device for burning discs, probably connecting with the console via USB. The 60 GB and 80 GB models would be fine because there is already enough (potential) storage for caching data to be burned, but not sure what Sony might do for the 20 GB and 40 GB models.

Am I making sense?

And this is all going to just add to more confusion for consumers. I mean, "digital copy", "managed copy", "BD Live", disc features that don't work on older players, ... I can't help but wonder if this will help or hurt adoption of the format.

I don't think the mainstream consumer will care that much about managed copy.

It will be great for people who want to build media servers which is something that I'd like to do. I know I'm going to need a ton of hard drive space...

So if a studio decides to not sign it, which costs money, they don't have to provide it. The ones that do offer it can also charge for the copy.

Doesn't sound like a winner to me unless they at least offer the first copy for free.

They do have to make ONE FREE backup availble for every bluray purchased once it takes effect. the article says they can also charge for additional copies as well.(meaning after the 1 free included one)

to me this sounds great, cause now we will be getting digital copies that in full HD quality.