http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act)
All I can say is, too much power for people who don't need or deserve it. I don't usually talk about politics like this but, I believe under these vague rules that even Treks-In-Scifi can be shut down because it uses "copyrighted material". And that's all they need under this bill to shut us down.
King
As long as they don't break the Internet for those of us in the rest of the world then they can do what they like :)
(Yeah, I know there's a fat chance of that happening :( Although can they legally stop me using a UK VISA card from buying something online? I'd like to think not.)
Ok, I'll admit I don't know a whole lot about this but let's ask this question: IF, as you suggest King, the government prevents podcasters from using any sort of music, audio, heck, even words that technically belong to another entity, what would happen to, oh I don't know, ALL podcasts out there? I'd dare say that the largest percentage of podcasts out there today are devoted to movies, TV shows, attractions, etc. If this "law" is strictly enforced, NO ONE will be podcasting that isn't employed by said entities. Therefore, it is safe to surmise that the only podcasts that will exists will be officially sanctioned ones. Sounds suspeciously like radio to me. I have high doubts this thing will fly.
Sounds like it's pretty unlikely this will pass. So, I'm pretty happy about that.
This bill is so loosely worded that yeah, many podcasts would likely be frozen. As far as what I've been able to read into and glean out of this bill, it is that poorly worded and structured that it threatens the entire internet. Now, whether the big companies will go after podcasts is something I'm not sure about. I guess it would depend...
It shouldn't fly. It fails to do the one thing it was "designed" to do, which is to stop piracy. Pirates took one look at this bill and laughed in amusement so hopefully such clear-headed thinking will prevail once again. I wish these companies would just give up trying to control the internet. Just wasting everyone's time here.
King
King, I know. In order to stop the pirates, they need to hire a pirate- where's captain Jack when you need him! :)
You know, there will always has been and always will be piracy, counterfeit and black market goods.
Before the Internet age when you talked about this you were talking about disreputable people selling dodgy of pirated goods from a suitcase, down a back street or in busy markets. In terms of entertainment this included pirate DVDs, CDs, video games and cassettes etc.
The thing is this still happens. People still go out and BUY pirate goods. It has been reported that a lot of the people selling physical pirate goods are associated with organised crime rings, prostitution, terrorism, drugs, you name it. Perhaps not directly the guy on the street, but his supplier. Shouldn't the governments of the world be concentrating on fighting THIS sort of piracy?
Yes there is a lot of piracy on the Internet but the "scenes" that are putting this stuff out are putting it out for FREE, trying to get some kudos not cash.
I'm not condoning internet piracy but the figures the content makers put out about how much money they are losing via Internet piracy are just ridiculous. People who buy still buy, the majority of those who download wouldn't buy in the first place. In fact during the early days of mp3 on the Internet it actually helped to make people aware of artists and some surveys actually reported that some of these downloaders went on to make legitimate purchases because they had access to low quality mp3s of that artist. And again there is no cash going to organised crime.
Just my 2 cents.
Heck Dan, I'd pay as much as 5 cents for your input! :) Well said by the way...
If you want to combat piracy:
Quit fighting piracy.
Time and again I've just seen companies lose customers over trying to fight Piracy. DRM for videogames is the best example, that has killed my interest in anything Ubisoft.
You want to combat piracy, iTunes, Netflix, all these companies provide cheap and easy way to get your content and people are more likely to go through them than anything else. Your never going to stop piracy, if it were possible, we wouldn't have crime in our world.
King
It looks like one of the latest SOPA situations was when GoDaddy was, at first in support of SOPA and started to lose thousands of domain name registrations as customers took their business elsewhere. It seems now that GoDaddy has reversed their stance and is no longer in support of SOPA. I like it! Hit them where it hurts - their pocket! More on this here:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2398067,00.asp (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2398067,00.asp)
P.S. Going to move this thread to the Tech Topic area.
Here's a fun, federally funded video for the kiddies that blames piracy for unemployment, drugs, gang violence, and child labor. Kind of hilarious. but scary that people are meant to believe this nonsense.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DvQFnSnhg7U# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DvQFnSnhg7U#)
yeek! lost jobs i can imagine, but drugs and crime? it doesn't make sense.
First of all I think SOPA is ridiculous and had no chance of passing the way it is now. As for piracy and my thoughts I on it I'm going to abstain from commenting as I work in the TV/Movie/Web industry and do not wish to get into any heated debates over this topic.
I am against piracy simply for the fact that I like supporting people who produce things I like with my dollars. That, and I don't want to see a crappy low-res version of a movie. This law, of course, would go too far and from what I can tell, we have all been guilty of violating this proposed law at one time or another. Plus, actual pirating operations could easily close up shop and open up another domain name, while users like you and me would get most of the blame for copyright infringement. Do we really want every aspect of internet life governed?
Some FYIs:
GoDaddy's CEO made it pretty clear they wish to continue supporting SOPA, they merely "retracted" their support to avoid losing customers. Which so far hasn't worked, 21,000 domains have moved from Godaddy.
Second: The tv and movie industry has spent way more money "combating" piracy than the suspected "loss" of business piracy has accrued. And that's only if the pirates would have paid for it if they had no choice. So that's something.
I already said it before, neither industry is doing anything to truly combat piracy. If you want to combat it, the first step is giving the consumers some respect =\
King
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on December 27, 2011, 02:13:44 PM
Some FYIs:
GoDaddy's CEO made it pretty clear they wish to continue supporting SOPA, they merely "retracted" their support to avoid losing customers. Which so far hasn't worked, 21,000 domains have moved from Godaddy.
Second: The tv and movie industry has spent way more money "combating" piracy than the suspected "loss" of business piracy has accrued. And that's only if the pirates would have paid for it if they had no choice. So that's something.
I already said it before, neither industry is doing anything to truly combat piracy. If you want to combat it, the first step is giving the consumers some respect =\
King
As I said before I don't want to get into a debate.. but King can you give us links to these accusations that you claim. Thanks
http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/23/godaddy-ceo-there-has-to-be-consensus-about-the-leadership-of-the-internet-community/ (http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/23/godaddy-ceo-there-has-to-be-consensus-about-the-leadership-of-the-internet-community/)
About Godaddy.
About the costs of piracy:
Retracted by request.
Btw, not sure that the big industries won't use PIP and SOPA to abuse others? Universal is already abusing it's limited power to censor a MegaUpload video from the Internet under a copyright claim, even though the claim is bogus.
http://www.digital-digest.com/news-63223-Stars-Come-Out-To-Support-Megaupload-In-New-Music-Video-Gets-Censored-By-Universal.html (http://www.digital-digest.com/news-63223-Stars-Come-Out-To-Support-Megaupload-In-New-Music-Video-Gets-Censored-By-Universal.html)
King
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on December 27, 2011, 04:30:48 PM
http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/23/godaddy-ceo-there-has-to-be-consensus-about-the-leadership-of-the-internet-community/ (http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/23/godaddy-ceo-there-has-to-be-consensus-about-the-leadership-of-the-internet-community/)
About Godaddy.
About the costs of piracy:
http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-costs-hollywood-more-than-us-bittorrent-piracy-111122/ (http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-costs-hollywood-more-than-us-bittorrent-piracy-111122/)
So tl;dr: the cost of piracy is much lower than the cost of fighting piracy with all the advertisements they do, the special interest groups and etc. there are more articles I can link here I'd needed for additional opinions on this matter, but Google search works too.
Btw, not sure that the big industries won't use PIP and SOPA to abuse others? Universal is already abusing it's limited power to censor a MegaUpload video from the Internet under a copyright claim, even though the claim is bogus.
http://www.digital-digest.com/news-63223-Stars-Come-Out-To-Support-Megaupload-In-New-Music-Video-Gets-Censored-By-Universal.html (http://www.digital-digest.com/news-63223-Stars-Come-Out-To-Support-Megaupload-In-New-Music-Video-Gets-Censored-By-Universal.html)
King
I think you should post a retraction because the cost of piracy link is merely speculation of speculative speculation and the author freely admits that there were zero facts used in his formula.
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on December 27, 2011, 07:43:26 PM
Quote from: X on December 27, 2011, 07:40:38 PM
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on December 27, 2011, 04:30:48 PM
http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/23/godaddy-ceo-there-has-to-be-consensus-about-the-leadership-of-the-internet-community/ (http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/23/godaddy-ceo-there-has-to-be-consensus-about-the-leadership-of-the-internet-community/)
About Godaddy.
About the costs of piracy:
http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-costs-hollywood-more-than-us-bittorrent-piracy-111122/ (http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-costs-hollywood-more-than-us-bittorrent-piracy-111122/)
So tl;dr: the cost of piracy is much lower than the cost of fighting piracy with all the advertisements they do, the special interest groups and etc. there are more articles I can link here I'd needed for additional opinions on this matter, but Google search works too.
Btw, not sure that the big industries won't use PIP and SOPA to abuse others? Universal is already abusing it's limited power to censor a MegaUpload video from the Internet under a copyright claim, even though the claim is bogus.
http://www.digital-digest.com/news-63223-Stars-Come-Out-To-Support-Megaupload-In-New-Music-Video-Gets-Censored-By-Universal.html (http://www.digital-digest.com/news-63223-Stars-Come-Out-To-Support-Megaupload-In-New-Music-Video-Gets-Censored-By-Universal.html)
King
I think you should post a retraction because the cost of piracy link is merely speculation of speculative speculation and the author freely admits that there were zero facts used in his formula.
Thats the point, no one has facts on any of this. But I shall retract my statement then.
King
Actually, the facts aren't that hard to get and the writer was playing fast and loose with the numbers. He was using a streaming service price instead of a pure unit download. If he actually used a per view download, then he would have to take the average price of a movie ticket while the film is at the movies and then multiply that times the number of people watching the movie times the number of times watched. That adds up to a lot of money really quick.
He also forgot to mention that whole part about torrents not being streaming and you have a digital copy when done. Each digital copy of a movie can run from 10 -20 bucks if you buy digitally. Not the few bucks a month it takes to stream from Netflix.
That whole exercise is actually insulting to anyone with half a brain. He tried to promote his agenda by devaluing the product and then saying it costs more to fight it than they are loosing.
I don't see how anyone can buy that line of crap.
here is some quick math. I just did a torrent search on mission impossible Ghost protocol. It has over 100,000 active leachers on various threads.
Now let's say they were all here in boston and watched the movie twice over the course of having it with one other person.
that's 400,000 missing tickets from the box office. At 10 buck a ticket on the cheap side, you're seeing a loss of 4 million dollars to the box office. let's toss in a 2.50 cost per customer for the concessions. (That means on average the customers spent 2.50 on concessions for the day. ) That another million out the window.
So that's 5 million in revenue in a week if they only watch it twice with two other people.
Multiply that times each movie being released and you can see why it's a bit of a problem.
Just as an aside, I think that these people are right to want to protect their products, but I don't think that SOPA is the answer. I also don't think that people are so stupid to not realize that they are choosing to be a criminal and a thief when they pirate something. It's kind of scummy behavior that I'll freely admit to having done myself to see shows from overseas. Having excuses as to why I did it doesn't make me any less of a scumbag at the end of the day. My actions have contributed in loss of jobs, cancellations of series, and other losses of revenue.
I'm not so dumb or self absorbed as to not see these things, but like everyone else, I have my excuses as to why.
Still a scumbag.
Here is a question: how many pirates would buy legally if they couldn't pirate? >If< that number is 0.00%, is anything truly lost?
King
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on December 27, 2011, 08:23:49 PM
Here is a question: how many pirates would buy legally if they couldn't pirate? >If< that number is 0.00%, is anything truly lost?
King
That's the most ridiculous statement ever made. Theft if theft is theft. What you just asked is how many people would buy something if they couldn't steal it, is anything truly lost. The answer is YES!
People stealing things drives up the price for those people that actually are buying things. If you keep driving up the price, more people will see it as a victim-less crime and add to the crime, thus further raising the price or lowering the profits.
Here's the thing. The rare time I do snag something from the interwebs, I 99% of the time buy it when it becomes available. Hell, I have Netflix and Hulu+ and I still bought Doctor Who's last season as a digital download ... even AFTER downloading some earlier.
Even if the pirates never had any intentions of buying something, other people are paying for it.
Ah ah ah, X, that was not a statement. That was a question.
Actually, I know there is a group of pirates who will pay for the content they downloaded, if they feel that the content is worth paying for, otherwise they just delete it and forget it ever exists. So your Dr Who example is actually apt.
I'm not saying piracy is right, but the current system isn't the greatest either, which is why Netflix is getting popular.
Acts like SOPA and PIP though are not solutions.
King
I think we can all agree that SOPA is a terrible idea. I have no problem with people who create content trying to protect it, but this isn't the way. It's nearly impossible to stop copying of content in the digital age. I believe the answer is pretty simple. Make it easy for people to pay for and get the content they want (iTunes is a great example). I have no problem admitting I've grabbed "Doctor Who" off the net when there were big delays for us in the US getting it and our UK buddies were talking about it. But, I pay for cable TV. I pay for BBC America. And now we are getting these shows basically the same day. In my view, the only real way to stop pirating of content is to make it easier to get it the right way. The gaming industry has gone through similar things. One of the big roadblocks is cable TV. Most people really dislike paying for a ton of channels and content they don't ever watch. Maybe one day we will get to the point of being able to just buy all the content we want to see on it's own as it airs. Anyway, just my thoughts.
I think part of the problem is that the figures the content owners give in lost sales is a made up figure. They are assuming that the people who pirate would all buy the content if they couldn't pirate which simply isn't true. Some would I'm sure and the flipside is that some actually buy because the liked the content they pirated and wanted to own it officially, the Dr. Who example etc.
Because of this reasoning I'm inclined to go with download piracy in the majority is a victimless crime in my opinion and sometimes can help to promote sales.
I've said it before they are targeting the wrong type of piracy here. They need to focus on the guys SELLING the content in markets, the streets etc because this isn't a victimless crime. In a lot of cases the money goes to fund organised crime and other nasty stuff. A guy downloading a TV show over BitTorrent isn't hurting anybody in comparison.
It's a challenging topic that certainly won't be solved here on the forums.
Personally it is very difficult for me to feel sorry for the giant Hollywood studio system that is applying all the pressure on the government to come down hard on the rampant downloading and theft that's going on right now. Especially the way they seem to want ISPs to do their police work for them.
Here's worldwide box office for the top few films this year...
1. HARRY POTTER & THE DEATHLY HALLOWS, PT. 2 (WB) - $1.328 bil
2. TRANSFORMERS: DARK OF THE MOON (PARAMOUNT) - $1.123 bil
3. PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: ON STRANGER TIDES (DISNEY) - $1.043 bil
4. KUNG FU PANDA 2 (PARAMOUNT) - $663 mil
5. THE TWILIGHT SAGA: BREAKING DAWN, PT. 1 (SUMMIT) - $634 mil*
Here's 2010:
1 Toy Story 3 $415,004,880
2 Alice in Wonderland $334,191,110
3 Iron Man 2 $312,433,331
4 The Twilight Saga: Eclipse $300,531,751
5 Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 $295,983,305
Looks to me like these figures represent quite a nice increase despite the rampant piracy going on these days. There's ten films representing over ten billion dollars worth of sales, just on box office alone, and those 2010 figures just represent totals up to December of that year, and don't include home video sales or anything else. I am sure Harry Potter and Twilight made more than the totals represented above. Now I know this isn't really any kind of argument, all I'm saying is it's hard for me to support the draconian measures the MPAA and RIAA are suggesting in order to ultimately line their pockets with more billions of dollars. The figures are just staggering.
I read something recently about a studio wanting to try a test and sell a brand new movie as pay-per-view on the day it was out in theaters. Now, they were planning on charging something like $60! But I guess theater owners got upset that it would ruin their business and so they didn't do it. Now, I love going to the movies and don't want to see that experience to go away, but I think they do need to try new methods of distribution.
Quote from: Rico on December 28, 2011, 08:31:07 AM
I read something recently about a studio wanting to try a test and sell a brand new movie as pay-per-view on the day it was out in theaters. Now, they were planning on charging something like $60! But I guess theater owners got upset that it would ruin their business and so they didn't do it. Now, I love going to the movies and don't want to see that experience to go away, but I think they do need to try new methods of distribution.
There was another story of a California theater chain wanting to sell monthly or annual memberships for unlimited movies but was blocked by the studio system for whatever reasons. Maybe the theaters and studios should work on getting together and playing nice before they decide to start targeting their potential customers with sanctions and criminal prosecution!
edit to add: Comcast frequently offers movies now before or same day release as in theaters through their on demand pay per view service. They aren't $60 bucks but generally cost a little more than their other pay per view features. They haven't been the huge blockbuster releases either, but more along the lines of films that are in limited release.
I'd love some type of monthly or yearly pass for theaters. The theater I go to has a little rewards program. If I pay for 20 movies, I get to see one free. Oh, and free popcorn on Tuesdays! :)
Another article on the Godaddy.com fallout here:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/247074/go_daddy_rivals_aim_to_capitalize_on_sopa_controversy.html (http://www.pcworld.com/article/247074/go_daddy_rivals_aim_to_capitalize_on_sopa_controversy.html)
Yep that ppv idea got killed but I can't see it would have harmed ticket sales that much. I would suspect it would have appealed to home theatre enthusiasts with state of the art systems an huge "cinema" rooms more than the average Joe. Also rich celebrities who'd like to see a movie but don't want to o out to a public theatre.
It's another example of the industry making it so hard for people to watch their legitimately bought content the way they want. I know people who are huge movie disc purchasers but they also download a copy to be a le to view it where they want!
The new "Ultra Violet" system that most studios have signed up to that is supposed to solve these problems is having issues already because of huge fragmentation between the implementation depending on the content provider. Studios make it as hard as possible for the consumer to use because they don't believe you shoud be able to "move" your content around. They want to keep to the old system where you buy multiple versions of the same movie to increase their revenue instead of trying to innovate.
At the same time the latest movies can be downloaded illegally in prestine quality on the day of release or sometimes before...
I know I harp on DRM a lot, but this is a picture on how you setup an account for Batman: Arkham City on the PC, step by step. Had they used Steamworks or nothing at all, there would only be the need to hit the play button and you can play your game.
Pirates have the no DRM option.
At the end of the day, the majority of it is a service problem. When pirates can get a better experience over those that actually pay for the content, that is a service problem. And one that Hollywood seems unwilling to fix anytime soon.
King
Oh Tim, heaven forbid you should have to enter a one time only code and keep your windows software updated. I'd jump through more hoops than that to play that awesome game.
Quote from: Jobydrone on December 28, 2011, 11:08:27 AM
Oh Tim, heaven forbid you should have to enter a one time only code and keep your windows software updated. I'd jump through more hoops than that to play that awesome game.
The only reason I'm not playing it right now is I haven't gotten around to playing my steam copy of Arkham Asylum. I was just using this game as an example, but jumping through these hoops isn't right. Regardless of how awesome the game is.
King
It's like the old DVD argument. Only people who buy legit discs have to sit through the "you wouldn't steal a car" featurette! Lol
What would have been really funny is if you entered the product registration once, then had to update, then asked for the code again and were told your code was already used and you couldn't play!
There are different ways of looking at piracy. I tend to think of it as a "test drive" or a loan.
I will admit to illegally downloading shows in the past. Often it is a show that is not worthy of watching and I soon drop it. If it is a quality show, it always results in me either catching up to broadcast dates and becoming a viewer, or maybe even buying the DVD boxsets. Dexter or Breaking Bad being prime examples of this...I really don't think, in my case anyway, that shows lose out on revenue. Quite the opposite in fact.
Sometimes I must confess, I will download a show even though I subscribe to all of the channels. This is because of the stupid decision people make to air stuff over here weeks after it first airs abroad. If people are talking about it weeks before I can see it and have moved on in topic conversation bor spoiled me, I won't watch it otherwise. They lose nothing...
Okay, alcohol is struggling to let me put into words my exact thoughts on the matter.....I may return to explain better :)
Needless to say, I think in some cases it can do a show more good than harm and consider my use of the illegal download beneficial to the show producers...
My point exactly Ant.
Look at the music industry. They spent years and billions on drm schemes etc spouting they were losing millions in lost sales. Where are we now? Amazon and Apple both sell music DRM free. Why? Because those that buy will always buy and those that download will always download.
I didn't buy online music when it had DRM because it restricted my freedom to listen to it where I wanted. I occassionally downloaded mp3 of unknown music and ended up buying it. Now I can get a long preview and a DRM free file to purchase. Perfect.
This is a pretty awesome article. It seems the offices of Congress like to go to torrent sites too. LOL!
http://www.dailytech.com/Congress+Plugs+AntiPiracy+Legislation+By+Day+Pirates+Porn+by+Night+/article23625.htm (http://www.dailytech.com/Congress+Plugs+AntiPiracy+Legislation+By+Day+Pirates+Porn+by+Night+/article23625.htm)
Quote from: Rico on December 29, 2011, 08:36:52 AM
This is a pretty awesome article. It seems the offices of Congress like to go to torrent sites too. LOL!
http://www.dailytech.com/Congress+Plugs+AntiPiracy+Legislation+By+Day+Pirates+Porn+by+Night+/article23625.htm (http://www.dailytech.com/Congress+Plugs+AntiPiracy+Legislation+By+Day+Pirates+Porn+by+Night+/article23625.htm)
LOL!! Is anyone actually shocked haha
My favourite ironic story was the one about the publishers of "Bittorrent For Dummies" trying to prosecute users who shared their book over, you guessed it, bittorrent!! :)
Quote from: Rico on December 29, 2011, 08:36:52 AM
This is a pretty awesome article. It seems the offices of Congress like to go to torrent sites too. LOL!
http://www.dailytech.com/Congress+Plugs+AntiPiracy+Legislation+By+Day+Pirates+Porn+by+Night+/article23625.htm (http://www.dailytech.com/Congress+Plugs+AntiPiracy+Legislation+By+Day+Pirates+Porn+by+Night+/article23625.htm)
It really makes me feel so proud to be an American to know that members of Congress are downloading "Gangland Cream Pie 21" while at work.
Although I did use Napster and LimeWire back in the day, I have never pirated or used a bit torrent site. Honestly, I just can't be bothered. :)
Quote from: Bryancd on December 29, 2011, 10:08:51 AM
Although I did use Napster and LimeWire back in the day, I have never pirated or used a bit torrent site. Honestly, I just can't be bothered. :)
Those seem like conflicting statements Bryan. You do know how things like Napster and Limewire worked, right?
Quote from: Rico on December 29, 2011, 01:02:20 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on December 29, 2011, 10:08:51 AM
Although I did use Napster and LimeWire back in the day, I have never pirated or used a bit torrent site. Honestly, I just can't be bothered. :)
Those seem like conflicting statements Bryan. You do know how things like Napster and Limewire worked, right?
He means he got his copy of "Gangland Cream Pie 21" officially! ;)
So the ESA (Electronic Software Association) now supports SOPA. Idiots. Wait for the gamer backlash on this one. And you thought GoDaddy got dragged over the coals.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/01/04/the-esa-supports-sopa-and-the-rest-of-the-industry-follows/ (http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/01/04/the-esa-supports-sopa-and-the-rest-of-the-industry-follows/)
Oh dear :(
Yeah....while Nintendo and Sony pulled support of SOPA rather quickly...ESA makes it a bit null and void atm.
King
A blackout of some key websites is set for January 18th (including Reddit, and maybe even Wikipedia and others). I think this might go a long way to show how bad SOPA could be if it somehow was able to pass.
http://techland.time.com/2012/01/12/sopa-reddit-confirms-january-18-blackout-wikipedia-and-others-may-follow/ (http://techland.time.com/2012/01/12/sopa-reddit-confirms-january-18-blackout-wikipedia-and-others-may-follow/)
House kills SOPA!!
http://www.examiner.com/computers-in-denver/house-kills-sopa (http://www.examiner.com/computers-in-denver/house-kills-sopa)
Quote from: Dangelus on January 16, 2012, 08:30:49 AM
House kills SOPA!!
http://www.examiner.com/computers-in-denver/house-kills-sopa (http://www.examiner.com/computers-in-denver/house-kills-sopa)
I don't think that article is accurate.
Quote from: Rico on January 16, 2012, 08:38:16 AM
Quote from: Dangelus on January 16, 2012, 08:30:49 AM
House kills SOPA!!
http://www.examiner.com/computers-in-denver/house-kills-sopa (http://www.examiner.com/computers-in-denver/house-kills-sopa)
I don't think that article is accurate.
Great. It's all over the Internet already! Some back peddling needs doing then.
As they say, "it ain't over until it's over." Plus, next up we have PIPA. Bottom line is, they need a better way than this.
Well, the bill is basically dead in the water. The key part of the legislation was removed and the White House will veto it no matter what.
Last I heard PIPA is sketchy so...maybe?
Btw, expect the protests from the websites soon, I think Reddit is the largest website to go dark.
King
So, what do people think of the blackouts? I like it!
I think it's great and I agree with king that this sucker has no political backing at this point.
Personally I think sopa is needed. I mean, think how bad the world would be without it! Wait...I meant soap. Got the letters mixed up. Never mind! :)
Quote from: QuadShot on January 18, 2012, 09:04:18 AM
Personally I think sopa is needed. I mean, think how bad the world would be without it! Wait...I meant soap. Got the letters mixed up. Never mind! :)
:)
I wrote a rather...passionate bit on my blog here: www.kingisaaclinksr.wordpress.com (http://www.kingisaaclinksr.wordpress.com) about SOPA and PIP and go on a blackout.
I will not support censorship, no matter what.
-King
Good move on Google's part: http://searchengineland.com/google-slows-web-crawlers-to-help-blackouts-sites-108477 (http://searchengineland.com/google-slows-web-crawlers-to-help-blackouts-sites-108477)
They are 'slowing' their web crawlers so that blacked out sites don't have their blacked-out states indexed and cached.
MPAA CEO is speaking out, saying it is irresponsible to have free speech rights. Ok ok, my words, we just don't support fattening his wallet. His real statement is that it is irresponsible of Reddit and Wikipedia and others to "punish" their customers by protesting SOPA and PIP. Right...
http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/18/2715892/MPAA-CEO-chris-dodd-statement-sopa-blackout-protest (http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/18/2715892/MPAA-CEO-chris-dodd-statement-sopa-blackout-protest)
Full Press Release from the MPAA here:
http://www.mpaa.org/resources/c4c3712a-7b9f-4be8-bd70-25527d5dfad8.pdf (http://www.mpaa.org/resources/c4c3712a-7b9f-4be8-bd70-25527d5dfad8.pdf)
Btw, I'm just loling over this. xD.
King
While I agree that SOPA and the like is way off base, and should never be passed, I do kind of agree that "blacking out" sites is realistically punishing the wrong people. Do any of us honestly believe that by blacking out Wikipedia, government is going to go "hey, they're RIGHT!". Don't think so. I understand the concept behind it. I do. Like don't buy gas on this day to punish oil companies. But that doesn't work either. By blacking out certain sites, the end users (that's US by the way) are punished because we can't access them when we WANT to or when we NEED to. Does this make me more sympathetic to them? Nope. Kind of pisses me off that I can't access the sites I want to. And just for the record, not everyone in the entertainment industry is shady and contemptuous and only care about money :) Just my two cents...
I'll grant that not the entire industry is shady. But the MPAA and others (who I was pretty much referring to) have shown time and again they do not care what consumer rights they have to stomp down in order for them to stay at the top of the pile. And they especially hate new technology showing up.
I think the blackout is right, which is my opinion of course. It wakes up people to the fact that these blackouts could have become the real deal had SOPA and PIP passed (and there is still a chance they might, sometime in the future). I guess I view 12-24 hours as not all that punishing in the grand scheme of things.
King
I don't think anyone is being punished, really. It's just an awareness thing. Not everybody that uses Wikipedia is completely cognizant of the flagrant censorship and first amendment trampling that is being proposed here.
Anyway, if you really NEED to access the Wiki today you can hit it up on your mobile phone or disable Java in your browser.
Quote from: QuadShot on January 18, 2012, 09:57:44 AM
While I agree that SOPA and the like is way off base, and should never be passed, I do kind of agree that "blacking out" sites is realistically punishing the wrong people. Do any of us honestly believe that by blacking out Wikipedia, government is going to go "hey, they're RIGHT!". Don't think so. I understand the concept behind it. I do. Like don't buy gas on this day to punish oil companies. But that doesn't work either. By blacking out certain sites, the end users (that's US by the way) are punished because we can't access them when we WANT to or when we NEED to. Does this make me more sympathetic to them? Nope. Kind of pisses me off that I can't access the sites I want to. And just for the record, not everyone in the entertainment industry is shady and contemptuous and only care about money :) Just my two cents...
I don't think it's punishment at all. This is a great way of showing what could happen. People that use without care sudden realize that these things do apply to them.
Per the freedcitionary.com: punishment: 4. (Psychology) Psychol any aversive stimulus administered to an organism as part of training
Black out is intended as a message and/or "training" to those who face the possibility of loss of what they may perceive is a "human right". So...yep, punishment! :)
This is why the blackout was the right thing to do and effective in getting the word out to people that had no clue about SOPA. Great job Wikipedia!
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57361418/one-early-winner-in-sopa-protest-wikipedia/?tag=pop;stories (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57361418/one-early-winner-in-sopa-protest-wikipedia/?tag=pop;stories)
Yeah, it was one of the lead stories on NBC Nightly News as well. Pretty effective at getting the word out.
Holy Wow. 162 MILLION hits in one day. That's unbelieveable.
Quote from: QuadShot on January 18, 2012, 11:54:25 AM
Per the freedcitionary.com: punishment: 4. (Psychology) Psychol any aversive stimulus administered to an organism as part of training
Black out is intended as a message and/or "training" to those who face the possibility of loss of what they may perceive is a "human right". So...yep, punishment! :)
Yeah, I'm going to stick to the merriam webster definition of punishment and this doesn't quite fit. Maybe that's why the free dictionary is free...
Definition of PUNISHMENT
1
: the act of punishing
2
a : suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution
b : a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure
3
: severe, rough, or disastrous treatment
pun·ish verb \ˈpə-nish\
Definition of PUNISH
transitive verb
1
a : to impose a penalty on for a fault, offense, or violation
b : to inflict a penalty for the commission of (an offense) in retribution or retaliation
2
a : to deal with roughly or harshly
b : to inflict injury on : hurt
Last I heard the people who sent in petitions is over 5 million. These bills better be dead and gone for good....but we will see.
King
No matter what you call it, it was very effective and really the only form of protest a virtual site can make.
Quote from: Bryancd on January 19, 2012, 09:54:02 AM
No matter what you call it, it was very effective and really the only form of protest a virtual site can make.
...Ok then...I shall call it...George. And I will love it, and squeeze it and make it my pet!! :)
Quote from: X on January 19, 2012, 09:45:09 AM
Quote from: QuadShot on January 18, 2012, 11:54:25 AM
Per the freedcitionary.com: punishment: 4. (Psychology) Psychol any aversive stimulus administered to an organism as part of training
Black out is intended as a message and/or "training" to those who face the possibility of loss of what they may perceive is a "human right". So...yep, punishment! :)
Yeah, I'm going to stick to the merriam webster definition of punishment and this doesn't quite fit. Maybe that's why the free dictionary is free...
Definition of PUNISHMENT
1
: the act of punishing
2
a : suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution
b : a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure
3
: severe, rough, or disastrous treatment
pun·ish verb \ˈpə-nish\
Definition of PUNISH
transitive verb
1
a : to impose a penalty on for a fault, offense, or violation
b : to inflict a penalty for the commission of (an offense) in retribution or retaliation
2
a : to deal with roughly or harshly
b : to inflict injury on : hurt
X, Wikipedia is free too...:) You win. I'm not arguing with you. Only...you ARE cute when you get riled! :) :)
Hehehe, Al got you there, Chris. :)
*laughs in the background*
King
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jkXtf_FZKbA# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jkXtf_FZKbA#)
Captain Picard on SOPA.
Whoa, major federal sting in New Zealand, four arrests made and the well known site Megaupload shut down for aiding and abetting copyright infringement. Backlash from yesterdays blackout? Seems too timely to be a coincidence to me.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/megaupload-shut-down-by-feds-seven-charged-four-arrested.ars (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/megaupload-shut-down-by-feds-seven-charged-four-arrested.ars)
I wouldn't put it past RIAA to suddenly pull this out, they hate Megaupload.
The timing of it is really suspicious. The day after the blackouts and one of the more well known websites gets killed? Hmmmmm
King
Ok, now I'm not advocating government "Big Brother" stuff at all. I believe in freedom. BUT...aren't groups like this "Megaupload" encouraging piracy? Downloading ilegally is downloading ilegally, which is theft. So, who cares what the timing is? If they bust these people who are stealing, what does it matter WHEN they do it?
Quote from: QuadShot on January 19, 2012, 02:48:19 PM
Ok, now I'm not advocating government "Big Brother" stuff at all. I believe in freedom. BUT...aren't groups like this "Megaupload" encouraging piracy? Downloading ilegally is downloading ilegally, which is theft. So, who cares what the timing is? If they bust these people who are stealing, what does it matter WHEN they do it?
IF they are proven guilty in court then yes. Go right ahead. Lock them up. I'm not defending Megaupload at all, I am just saying that the timing is suspicious. But hey, if it was just a weird timing then whatever.
And actually, Filesharing does not encourage piracy. (Which is what Megaupload does). It is the users themselves that take it upon themselves to share content that shouldn't be. There are plenty of legitimiate uses for Megaupload. Just like there is plenty of legitimate uses for YouTube (Which is vid sharing).
I've never personally used Mega, I use Dropbox for anything I might want to share via a link. :)
King
I am all for shutting down all the bit torrent sites trafficking copyrighted material. I have NEVER pirated any copyrighted material since the days of Napster and Limewire.
Quote from: QuadShot on January 19, 2012, 02:48:19 PM
Ok, now I'm not advocating government "Big Brother" stuff at all. I believe in freedom. BUT...aren't groups like this "Megaupload" encouraging piracy? Downloading ilegally is downloading ilegally, which is theft. So, who cares what the timing is? If they bust these people who are stealing, what does it matter WHEN they do it?
The concern for me has nothing to do with the timing, or even the "grey" area surrounding what the site is about which if I am not mistaken was offering server space for people to upload and download from and making money from advertising revenue. My major issue has to do with the United States government charging into foreign countries and arresting non-US citizens that are operating a legitimate business in their own country...all to defend the MPAA and RIAA copyright claims. Just seems a bit of a scary precedent.
This would all go away...if people would STOP STEALING! just because a network doesn't serve up the content you want to see when you want to see it, where you want to see it, and how you want to see it does;t give one carte blanche to pirate it! I hear on all these podcasts people laughing their butt's off about acquiring content "through other means" and sit their and justify their theft. Just because their is an internet doesn't give people the right to steal.
Quote from: Bryancd on January 19, 2012, 03:58:04 PM
This would all go away...if people would STOP STEALING! just because a network doesn't serve up the content you want to see when you want to see it, where you want to see it, and how you want to see it does;t give one carte blanche to pirate it! I hear on all these podcasts people laughing their butt's off about acquiring content "through other means" and sit their and justify their theft. Just because their is an internet doesn't give people the right to steal.
Yeah, I agree with this. I think it's become the norm for people to just download for free a new album, especially the generation behind me. That said, I used to copy many albums onto tape with my dual-tape deck and turntable. Sharing has been going on forever, except now the numbers are so staggering. It's a tough issue, but the answer isn't this thing.
Quote from: Chris-El on January 19, 2012, 04:20:55 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on January 19, 2012, 03:58:04 PM
This would all go away...if people would STOP STEALING! just because a network doesn't serve up the content you want to see when you want to see it, where you want to see it, and how you want to see it does;t give one carte blanche to pirate it! I hear on all these podcasts people laughing their butt's off about acquiring content "through other means" and sit their and justify their theft. Just because their is an internet doesn't give people the right to steal.
Yeah, I agree with this. I think it's become the norm for people to just download for free a new album, especially the generation behind me. That said, I used to copy many albums onto tape with my dual-tape deck and turntable. Sharing has been going on forever, except now the numbers are so staggering. It's a tough issue, but the answer isn't this thing.
Except that the numbers aren't that staggering to begin with.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/04/us-government-finally-admits-most-piracy-estimates-are-bogus.ars (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/04/us-government-finally-admits-most-piracy-estimates-are-bogus.ars)
Our own government admits that the numbers aren't all that high as the RIAA and the MPAA make it out to be and that its mostly guessing with no formal collecting of data.
King
My wife has been working on a massive market research project for Disney in an effort to confront global piracy of their intellectual property, Internet and physical media. It is a big deal. Do you download illegal content, King? If so, how do you justify it?
Quote from: Bryancd on January 19, 2012, 04:41:00 PM
My wife has been working on a massive market research project for Disney in an effort to confront global piracy of their intellectual property, Internet and physical media. It is a big deal. Do you download illegal content, King? If so, how do you justify it?
*coughs* *looks around for Big brother* *;)*
Do I download illegal content: Depends.
The main reason I download "illegally" is due to a lack of service options or consumer-rights-violating measures like extreme-DRM options or locked forever behind an ocean barrier. And its a common attitude I might add.
Valve's CEO said that piracy is a SERVICE issue. Valve turned Russia, one of the former biggest gaming piracy wastelands, into one of its biggest markets thanks to Steam. Did the population have to go with Steam? No. But they chose it because the value was good enough. iTunes saved the music-industry's ass from Napster and Pirate Bay. Why? Because the service was better. Hulu and Netflix have the potential to save TV/Movie from being pirated to death, but from what I can tell the content providers are refusing to adapt and as such, piracy is still rampant because Hulu and Netflix do not provide a superior option, at least for new content.
I do not stand for piracy. Piracy doesn't sit well with me and I always love to pay for content as long as its pro-consumer. Things like iCloud have settled a lot of my issues with buying digital content, though movies-via-digital needs a lot of help. (Ultraviolet is not it either). The main reason I might download illegal content is a lack of service options. If you give me a reasonable price and a reasonable product for what I'm paying for, I will pay for it. If my only reason for pirating something is that I cannot afford it, then I can't afford it, I do NOT download it and it stays on my wishlist for whenever I get the funds to pay for the content via iTunes/Amazon/etc. I learned long ago to be content with what I have. The amount of stuff that I have acquired through alternative methods is small compared to the amount that I legitimately paid for. Whether that is TV, Movie, Gaming, or otherwise.
Tbh, even then, I can't be arsed to download TV shows anymore. Even though I do pay for cable. Even if the content is transmitted freely. Even if it is to catch up on the shows I miss because my schedule is no longer TV friendly anymore. 2011 will be the last year I bother with new content and from now on I'm just going to stick with Netflix. The commercials are getting insane, the shows are getting cancelled left and right and its clear they don't want to adapt to the internet since they keep pulling content from Hulu/Netflix. So why should I support such an industry.
Oh and Disney? Its probably because they keep locking their content behind vaults. Stop that practice and offer it on Amazon/iTunes and you'll probably severely reduce piracy.
King
And tbh, it should be just as illegal for the content providers to screw with their customers like they have just as much as it is illegal to pirate content. Its not like these businesses go out of their way to be likeable, RIAA, MPAA, etc.
Then maybe I would actually sympathize with them. As it is, I would not shed a single tear if the TV, Movie and Music industry burned to the ground tomorrow.
My 2cents.
And yes, I know people on this forum work in these industries. I am not pointing any of this at you.
King
So because the content isn't available the way you want, it's ok to get it by other means. So until someone provides YOU with what YOU perceive s a better service, it's ok to steal. And that's a common feeling so that makes it ok. And yet somehow I manage to survive without stealing content.
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on January 19, 2012, 04:27:49 PM
Quote from: Chris-El on January 19, 2012, 04:20:55 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on January 19, 2012, 03:58:04 PM
This would all go away...if people would STOP STEALING! just because a network doesn't serve up the content you want to see when you want to see it, where you want to see it, and how you want to see it does;t give one carte blanche to pirate it! I hear on all these podcasts people laughing their butt's off about acquiring content "through other means" and sit their and justify their theft. Just because their is an internet doesn't give people the right to steal.
Yeah, I agree with this. I think it's become the norm for people to just download for free a new album, especially the generation behind me. That said, I used to copy many albums onto tape with my dual-tape deck and turntable. Sharing has been going on forever, except now the numbers are so staggering. It's a tough issue, but the answer isn't this thing.
Except that the numbers aren't that staggering to begin with.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/04/us-government-finally-admits-most-piracy-estimates-are-bogus.ars (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/04/us-government-finally-admits-most-piracy-estimates-are-bogus.ars)
Our own government admits that the numbers aren't all that high as the RIAA and the MPAA make it out to be and that its mostly guessing with no formal collecting of data.
King
Isn't that kind of like the police saying that the jerks who broke into your house didn't take as much of your crap as we initially thought? Theft is theft. There seems to be a feeling that pervades with many people that they are owed things, and it just isn't so. People in this country love movies, they love TV. But when my friend sits at home and watches movies that are in the theater, movies he didn't pay to see, you can't tell me it doesn't affect the box office. These businesss exist to make money, not be likable. I agree that a large net would be cast due to this bill, a chainsaw where a scalpel is needed. But saying that piracy isn't a problem is kinda false...
Quote from: Bryancd on January 19, 2012, 05:51:45 PM
So because the content isn't available the way you want, it's ok to get it by other means. So until someone provides YOU with what YOU perceive s a better service, it's ok to steal. And that's a common feeling so that makes it ok. And yet somehow I manage to survive without stealing content.
Do not put words in my mouth Bryan, I do not tolerate that. I did not say that because it is a common feeling that it is ok for me as well. I was simply stating it as a fact/opinion, nothing more. I also did not say that what I was doing was ok either. It sickens me to even have to do it which is why I rarely ever do it. 99.99% of the time if its not available on the services I use, then I just move on. I was using my opinion, however, to say why other people justify it. Why other people will more likely pirate it. Agree or disagree, its a problem that doesn't require a sledgehammer to fix.
@Chris. Your right. But the MPAA and etc make this issue out to be this economy-crippling affair when really, we don't even know how much damage is actually being done. Spouting off numbers is lying. I hate. Liars. And this whole SOPA and PIPA thing did not need to be shoved down our throats when there are far more important problems we need to deal with.
As I said, I don't support it.
King
You're right about one thing, we have FAR worse problems to deal with in this country and this WORLD than this. That said, I do like it when a supposedly listless public gets fired up about stuff!
Quote from: Chris-El on January 19, 2012, 06:18:24 PM
You're right about one thing, we have FAR worse problems to deal with in this country and this WORLD than this. That said, I do like it when a supposedly listless public gets fired up about stuff!
Kinda makes you wish we would get more fired up about more stuff eh? Over 7.5 million people petitioned SOPA. That shocked me to hear those numbers.
King
I'm not putting words in your mouth, you are justifying and equivocating why you have downloaded content without paying for it.
And on the Republicn debate just now all the candidates said thy do not support this legislation.
Quote from: Bryancd on January 19, 2012, 06:21:20 PM
I'm not putting words in your mouth, you are justifying and equivocating why you have downloaded content without paying for it.
And on the Republicn debate just now all the candidates said thy do not support this legislation.
Ok, granted I should have put the line about everyone else in another post or whatever. I don't use the mob mentality to justify my actions.
And not really surprised to hear that out of the republican candidates. If they did support it, they would lose a chunk of their younger voters.
King
I think SOPA oversteps and the LAST thing anyone wants is more government intervention into our lives. Doubtful this will pass but the recent "blackouts" were a bit silly. Both sides have a point. People are right - this is not as widespread as some claim.
Rick, I'll see you at the movie on Sunday.
seinfeld bootleg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QykERAYOoKE#ws)
Let me bottom line this. SOPA is DOA, Forget it. Piracy, however, is a real issue. Small relative to many others facing this country, but an issue non the less. This is not a moral issue, I don't think King or my younger brother, or anyone else of the many people I know and love who downloads content illegally is a bad person. What this is an economic issue. People steal content over the internet to avoid PAYING for it. For the most part, other times it's simply because it's not available via broadcast or cable or satellite in the US. People who do that are just petulant children who need it NOW! So the economics are you either pay for it or not. If you think what is offered is too expensive, vote with your wallet and don't buy it. Using the internet as an excuse to get around that simple approach of fair capitalism is BS. It's that people are TOO CHEAP to pony up what the market is demanding. Don't like it, change the market the legal way.
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on January 19, 2012, 06:14:34 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on January 19, 2012, 05:51:45 PM
So because the content isn't available the way you want, it's ok to get it by other means. So until someone provides YOU with what YOU perceive s a better service, it's ok to steal. And that's a common feeling so that makes it ok. And yet somehow I manage to survive without stealing content.
Do not put words in my mouth Bryan, I do not tolerate that. I did not say that because it is a common feeling that it is ok for me as well. I was simply stating it as a fact/opinion, nothing more. I also did not say that what I was doing was ok either. It sickens me to even have to do it which is why I rarely ever do it. 99.99% of the time if its not available on the services I use, then I just move on. I was using my opinion, however, to say why other people justify it. Why other people will more likely pirate it. Agree or disagree, its a problem that doesn't require a sledgehammer to fix.
@Chris. Your right. But the MPAA and etc make this issue out to be this economy-crippling affair when really, we don't even know how much damage is actually being done. Spouting off numbers is lying. I hate. Liars. And this whole SOPA and PIPA thing did not need to be shoved down our throats when there are far more important problems we need to deal with.
As I said, I don't support it.
King
King, can I ask you an honest question. We both know that people here are guilty of downloading shows. We also know that it's a crime, but you say that 99% of the time it's not on the services that you use, but what services do you actually pay for.
I'll be the first to admit I'll DL something if I missed it on my TIVO, but then again, I pay for EVERY cable channel that my provider offers, Vudo, Hulu+, Netflix, Xbox live, and Zune pass. I also own about 100+ Digital shows and movies. I know what I'm doing is wrong, but at the end of the day, my money does go to the people that I watch.
I know you said it sicken you to do it, but if that was the case, why do it? That's kind of worse than just admitting you do it because you don't want to pay. What you said reads like you can't help yourself and are torn up because you are doing wrong, yet you still do it. That's some addictive behavior.
So for the record, when I do time jump some things that I want to see, I make every effort to pay for said content down the road.
Quote from: Bryancd on January 19, 2012, 06:55:14 PM
Let me bottom line this. SOPA is DOA, Forget it. Piracy, however, is a real issue. Small relative to many others facing this country, but an issue non the less. This is not a moral issue, I don't think King or my younger brother, or anyone else of the many people I know and love who downloads content illegally is a bad person. What this is an economic issue. People steal content over the internet to avoid PAYING for it. For the most part, other times it's simply because it's not available via broadcast or cable or satellite in the US. People who do that are just petulant children who need it NOW! So the economics are you either pay for it or not. If you think what is offered is too expensive, vote with your wallet and don't buy it. Using the internet as an excuse to get around that simple approach of fair capitalism is BS. It's that people are TOO CHEAP to pony up what the market is demanding. Don't like it, change the market the legal way.
Can I download and pay for it later? I mean I'm pretty good a spending several hundred a month on my entertainment stuff. Yeah I know that's not an excuse, but it is one real example of someone that does pay for content even after they have seen it for free.
What gets me is the people that don't pay for anything and then say they do it because it's not available for them.
Bryan, you've said several times in several different threads you used to use Napster and Limewire back when those were popular (not that long ago really). What caused your change of mind on the subject? Download a virus or something? ;) just kidding
I believe the real bite that piracy is taking is out of the home video market...pretty much every movie that comes out on DVD and Bluray is available to download illegally about a month or so before it is released in stores. Films that are still in the theater are not generally available in any form that a discerning viewer would want to watch, except around awards season when those screener copies start to float around out there.
The only way it will stop is if the government forces the Internet providers to turn in, sanction, or cut off their customers. It's not gonna happen in this country, unless Comcast, Cox, and Time Warner decide that cutting off the percentage of their users that pirate isn't going to drastically impact their bottom line. We'll see about that.
I believe that the number of people who routinely pirate isn't going to change much, and that the content providers will continue to flourish as they always have by adapting to the changing times and figuring out how to best take people's money with the new tech that comes at us faster and aster as the years go by. The music industry is doing that now, coming up with creative ways to market their products and making most of their money on tour at live shows. My prediction is that physical media is sooner rather than later going the way of the dodo, and that services like Netflix and On Demand a la carte viewing is going to be the future of how we consume our media.
"It's that people are TOO CHEAP to pony up what the market is demanding."
Oddly, "Artificial Scarcity" may be a better description of the situation. The current market prices do not necessarily reflect the true economic value of a product with negligible marginal cost of production...
@X:
I pay for Netflix and Cable, iTunes season passes once in a while and DVDs even more once in a while. The only reason here lately that I DL stuff is because I missed it and need to time jump it, rather than wait for the entire season to come out later. Even then, someone eventually gets paid by me. As for the 99% statement, I wasn't really referring to shows, just content in general. So as far as shows go, I rarely do not have access to it as far as buying it later is concerned. Its watching it within a month of its release that it gets difficult. Hulu used to have it, now they don't and no one else does either.
That entire sickens statement was poorly chosen. Its pretty much what you said. I know what I'm doing is considered wrong, but someone does get paid eventually.
I think that answers your questions X.
King
Again, my easy answer to all this is make content easy to get exactly what you want (not pay $100 a month for cable where the majority of it you don't watch), and charge a reasonable price. I'm liking a lot of what I'm seeing with electronic comics these days and the direction it's going. For DC comics you can buy e-versions the day they come out at full price (same price as the comic), and a few weeks later the price drops (usually it goes from $2.99 to $1.99). This allows paper comics to still be sold in comic shops and it also makes the individual content easy to get and pretty cheap. Anyway, I think most people want to do the right thing. We'll see what the future holds.
To lighten the mood a bit after the recent big, Megaupload site takedown....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THFZBi6nGJg# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THFZBi6nGJg#)
Hehehe...I always find this funny, to lighten the mood, let's all laugh at Hitler :)
Interesting development, apparently Whitehouse.gov and the Department of Justice are blacking out their websties in protest of the SOPA initiatives. No wait, it's a pissed off hacker group taking revenge on the US Government for what they percieve as an illegal police action on foreign soil.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/anonymous-strikes-back-against-justice-universal-sopa-supportersattack-on-whitehousegov-underway.ars (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/anonymous-strikes-back-against-justice-universal-sopa-supportersattack-on-whitehousegov-underway.ars)
Quote from: Bryancd on January 19, 2012, 06:55:14 PM
Let me bottom line this. SOPA is DOA, Forget it. Piracy, however, is a real issue. Small relative to many others facing this country, but an issue non the less. This is not a moral issue, I don't think King or my younger brother, or anyone else of the many people I know and love who downloads content illegally is a bad person. What this is an economic issue. People steal content over the internet to avoid PAYING for it. For the most part, other times it's simply because it's not available via broadcast or cable or satellite in the US. People who do that are just petulant children who need it NOW! So the economics are you either pay for it or not. If you think what is offered is too expensive, vote with your wallet and don't buy it. Using the internet as an excuse to get around that simple approach of fair capitalism is BS. It's that people are TOO CHEAP to pony up what the market is demanding. Don't like it, change the market the legal way.
Very well said Bryan. I agree.
Look, there has been many, many times that I wanted to get a movie, song, program that I just couldn't afford. The easy thing to do would have been to visit one of these "file sharing" sites and get it for free. But...it's not legal. I don't care what kind of spray paint you put on that turd, it's still a turd. You can say file sharing sites are harmless and their intent is NOT to promote piracy, but that's BS and we all know it. If you deny, you're justifying. King, I know you're not a bad person, not at all. But dude, saying that piracy is wrong, then admitting you download things you want because they're currently too expensive or not readily available to you is just spray painting a dog turd and calling it art. Stealing is stealing. A lot of people justify their actions by claiming "art and entertainment and internet, etc" should be free, we shouldn't have to pay for what belongs to everyone. Well, pooh on that my friends. The way I view it is like this: do you work for free? Do you go into your job everyday and tell your boss don't pay me, what I do should be free to the world? Uh, no...So why the heck would you feel that another's hard work should be free to you? Maybe I'm from a different era where I believe you are only "due" what you're due. If you work, you get paid. If you want something, you pay for it, and I'm not saying "hey, I go to movies and pay the stupid high cost of a ticket so I AM paying for entertainment down the line". That mentality doesn't fly. It doesn't matter that you pay for cable, pay for NetFlix. If you download something that you are not actively paying for...stealing.
I agree with Rico that we are over charged for stuff most of us don't use, and I would LOVE for cable and satellite TV companies to start offering "cafeteria" plans, but until then we have two choices: Pay for what we want or do without. It may be oversimplifying, but using the mentality that I want this movie but can't afford to buy the DVD so I'll download it is the same as saying I can't afford a new car so I'll go to the lot and take one. Just my 2.5 cents (inflation and all!)
Quote from: Jobydrone on January 20, 2012, 06:59:32 AM
Interesting development, apparently Whitehouse.gov and the Department of Justice are blacking out their websties in protest of the SOPA initiatives. No wait, it's a pissed off hacker group taking revenge on the US Government for what they percieve as an illegal police action on foreign soil.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/anonymous-strikes-back-against-justice-universal-sopa-supportersattack-on-whitehousegov-underway.ars (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/anonymous-strikes-back-against-justice-universal-sopa-supportersattack-on-whitehousegov-underway.ars)
Welllll, we do have a tendancy of sticking our noses where it doesn't belong. That said, I don't the hacker group is even morally correct. This is up the justice system now.
King
@Al Its as I said, I'm dropping TV this year because I keep defaulting to alternative methods to watch the shows. Hasn't been a worthwhile movie this year to bother watching paid or otherwise ;). (Well, at least it sure feels like it).
As far as file-sharing goes, there are legitimate reasons to using them. Yea, I know, not everyone uses them legitimately, but there have been movie companies who distributed their movie purely through a Torrent website as a way to promote their movie and I think they accepted donations if I remember correctly. And if Megaupload's commercial is to be believed, several prominent artists use it to share their music across the web.
And I don't believe everything should be free. That's a ridiculous notion no matter what. But these companies could be doing a better job. Tis all I'm saying.
King
King, fair enough. And by the way, if anyone is interested in file sharing, I have some shirtless photos of Bryan posing suggestively on a white bear skin rug I can share with you :)
Quote from: QuadShot on January 20, 2012, 09:32:42 AM
King, fair enough. And by the way, if anyone is interested in file sharing, I have some shirtless photos of Bryan posing suggestively on a white bear skin rug I can share with you :)
:ohbaby
Quote from: QuadShot on January 20, 2012, 09:32:42 AM
King, fair enough. And by the way, if anyone is interested in file sharing, I have some shirtless photos of Bryan posing suggestively on a white bear skin rug I can share with you :)
*coughs* I'll pass. ;).
King
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on January 20, 2012, 09:59:16 AM
Quote from: QuadShot on January 20, 2012, 09:32:42 AM
King, fair enough. And by the way, if anyone is interested in file sharing, I have some shirtless photos of Bryan posing suggestively on a white bear skin rug I can share with you :)
*coughs* I'll pass. ;).
King
Ok, but you don't know what your missing...
Why do all of our conversations degenerate to racy pics of Bryan? :)
Quote from: billybob476 on January 20, 2012, 11:41:11 AM
Why do all of our conversations degenerate to racy pics of Bryan? :)
Really? You have to ask? :)
Quote from: Dangelus on January 20, 2012, 12:56:46 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on January 20, 2012, 10:20:43 AM
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on January 20, 2012, 09:59:16 AM
*coughs* I'll pass. ;).
King
...chicken...
There was a chicken involved?!! ;)
Uh, yeah, but the chicken has been put under a court gag-order not to talk about...well, what happened...:)
Honestly, I keep forgetting what Bryan looks like thanks to his Avatar. I keep thinking he looks like that every time he reads my posts on this forum. Then when we have the occasional vid podcast, well, reality sets back in. And honestly, I don't want to see Captain Kirk on a rug o_O....
I'm not crazy.
King
So this happened: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120120/14472117492/mpaa-directly-publicly-threatens-politicians-who-arent-corrupt-enough-to-stay-bought.shtml (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120120/14472117492/mpaa-directly-publicly-threatens-politicians-who-arent-corrupt-enough-to-stay-bought.shtml)
Disgusting.
King
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on January 22, 2012, 02:54:22 PM
So this happened: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120120/14472117492/mpaa-directly-publicly-threatens-politicians-who-arent-corrupt-enough-to-stay-bought.shtml (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120120/14472117492/mpaa-directly-publicly-threatens-politicians-who-arent-corrupt-enough-to-stay-bought.shtml)
Disgusting.
King
Good. Maybe now politicians will have to EARN their jobs, instead of having a mega-rich movie/TV/recording star buy their elections for them...
Quote from: QuadShot on January 22, 2012, 03:43:42 PM
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on January 22, 2012, 02:54:22 PM
So this happened: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120120/14472117492/mpaa-directly-publicly-threatens-politicians-who-arent-corrupt-enough-to-stay-bought.shtml (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120120/14472117492/mpaa-directly-publicly-threatens-politicians-who-arent-corrupt-enough-to-stay-bought.shtml)
Disgusting.
King
Good. Maybe now politicians will have to EARN their jobs, instead of having a mega-rich movie/TV/recording star buy their elections for them...
Almost as if it was intended to be that way....*shocking*
King ;)
very interesting video here that sounds very much like Wil Wheaton has been talking to our very own Tim about DRM and piracy:
Wil Wheaton: The Entertainment Industry Is To Blame For Piracy - Comic-Con 2011 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oWPqcWt8Es#ws)
I have more influence than you can possibly imagine mwhahahahahaha.
If only ;).
King
That was a pathetic, obtuse argument to justify theft. Whil Weatom I'm sure is a very nice guy, but...
So he can't watch what he wants to watch, blames the content providers, and just steals it instead. Weak.
Quote from: Bryancd on January 25, 2012, 11:23:10 AM
That was a pathetic, obtuse argument to justify theft. Whil Weatom I'm sure is a very nice guy, but...
So he can't watch what he wants to watch, blames the content providers, and just steals it instead. Weak.
No WONDER Sheldon holds so much contempt for Mr. Wheaton! :) I agree Bryan...this is a never ending argument though: stealing is stealing...no matter the justification.
Settle down, Beavis. If this issue boiled down to "stealing is wrong" then there wouldn't be so much debate going on all over the world about it. It's about alot more. You're not doing your argument any favors by name calling, being accusative, and overly simplistic.
We spent many pages discussing this. And I don't have to like or admire Wil Wheaton, that's my prerogative. And it does boil down to stealing is wrong depsite efforts to equivocate the substance of the debate.
Yes I have read the whole thread Bryan. I wonder if you have, because you were asked a couple of direct questions in previous pages and didn't answer, which of course is also your perogative but strikes me as a bit disingenuous considering your black and white viewpoint on the subject. Perhaps to you it all boils down to "stealing is wrong" but to many others there's more to it. Calling people who don't agree with you pathetic and obtuse is not debate, it's namecalling, regardless of whether you like or admire the person you're debating with.
Rereading I see you called his argument pathetic and obtuse, not him, which is different, sorry about that.
Quote from: Jobydrone on January 25, 2012, 11:59:32 AM
Yes I have read the whole thread Bryan. I wonder if you have, because you were asked a couple of direct questions in previous pages and didn't answer, which of course is also your prerogative but strikes me as a bit disingenuous considering your black and white viewpoint on the subject.
You were the only person who addressed me directly and all you asked is why I stopped using LimeWrie and then said just kidding, I didn't feel it was necessary to the conversation to respond.
Okay, none of this matters to me anyway, I didn't post that video to start an argument, that's for sure. I thought it was interesting because he was echoing statements that were made by various people earlier on in this thread. The one thing he said that I absolutely agree with is that what will end piracy is changes in the way that content is distributed, not censorship, punishments, or government interference.
Quote from: Bryancd on January 25, 2012, 11:23:10 AM
That was a pathetic, obtuse argument to justify theft. Whil Weatom I'm sure is a very nice guy, but...
So he can't watch what he wants to watch, blames the content providers, and just steals it instead. Weak.
The only problem is that he wasn't saying to pirate stuff he was talking DRM. He was talking about his PAID content not being accessible. He's pissed because he can't watch what he paid for when he wants to. I think that on this one, you jumped the gun and attacked without listening to what he was saying.
Quote from: X on January 25, 2012, 12:44:41 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on January 25, 2012, 11:23:10 AM
That was a pathetic, obtuse argument to justify theft. Whil Weatom I'm sure is a very nice guy, but...
So he can't watch what he wants to watch, blames the content providers, and just steals it instead. Weak.
The only problem is that he wasn't saying to pirate stuff he was talking DRM. He was talking about his PAID content not being accessible. He's pissed because he can't watch what he paid for when he wants to. I think that on this one, you jumped the gun and attacked without listening to what he was saying.
No I know what he was saying and I understand the distinction but it's the same argument. For example, what if back in the day I owned a VCR and a BetaMax (we did by the way). So I buy a copy of a movie on Beta because it becomes available first. Then a week later it's released on VHS. I paid for the content in a specific format. If i want it in another format, I would have to pay again. Or should I walk into target and steal the VHS version under the defense that I already paid for the content? Are you listening to what I am saying?
Quote from: Jobydrone on January 25, 2012, 12:14:08 PM
The one thing he said that I absolutely agree with is that what will end piracy is changes in the way that content is distributed, not censorship, punishments, or government interference.
I agree and harken back to what Apple managed to do for music distribution. But until then, laws should be enforced. Period.
Quote from: Jobydrone on January 25, 2012, 11:46:38 AM
Settle down, Beavis. If this issue boiled down to "stealing is wrong" then there wouldn't be so much debate going on all over the world about it. It's about alot more. You're not doing your argument any favors by name calling, being accusative, and overly simplistic.
Wow..Beavis. Not THAT's not being insulting is it?
Quote from: Jobydrone on January 25, 2012, 12:14:08 PM
Okay, none of this matters to me anyway, I didn't post that video to start an argument, that's for sure. I thought it was interesting because he was echoing statements that were made by various people earlier on in this thread. The one thing he said that I absolutely agree with is that what will end piracy is changes in the way that content is distributed, not censorship, punishments, or government interference.
Here's the thing with that. Change takes time. Even after the transcontinental rail was completed, there were still ships that moved the cargo. After the car and highway were invented, there were still and are still people transporting good via the rail and ships. New means of distribution doesn't mean that they need to be implemented or can be implemented fast and easily. There are far more things to take into account other than personal convenience.
Let's pretend that everything can instantly go digital. What are the long and short term results of that?
Will stores that carry movies still carry them because it would seem like a poor use of space to do so when the competition is only a click away instantly.
So we don't have to move the physical product. That means we can cut hours and jobs in the retail store because people won't be coming in for stuff they bought before. dvds, blueray, and players can all go bye bye. So can the people's who's jobs it were to build the players or stamp and package the disc, oh and the guy that trucked it in from the guys on the boats.
Let's also kill those ads because who wants to watch those when you can get the ad free version instantly and whereever. Let's also kill the rating system because it won't matter if you can't advertise.
What about your role as a business to support the retailers that have supported you ... nah, screw it because I want to watch something now.
Every action has consequences and these are the ones that I can come up with despite not having a degree in marketing and supply chain economics.
things take time because they need to take time. Pull the wrong thread and everything unravels.
Interesting way to look at it, Chris.
X, the Good Lord knows I really don't want to debate, but your last statement kind of cries for it. Yes, you have a valid point but isn't that point also why our world is suffering at the whims of Oil companies? Let's not convert to a more effecient, planet friendly fuel source because that would put so many people out of work. No more combustion engine plants, no more oil fields, oil rigs, no more gas stations, no more need for oil changes, etc. That kind of thinking is as dangerous as what you're saying progress is. I know it's difficult and yes, progress will equate to a lot of people having to seek employment elsewhere, but in the end, that progress can and will benefit the planet...We can't lean on the crutch of the past to prevent us from looking to the future...
Quote from: Bryancd on January 25, 2012, 12:51:55 PM
Quote from: X on January 25, 2012, 12:44:41 PM
Quote from: Bryancd on January 25, 2012, 11:23:10 AM
That was a pathetic, obtuse argument to justify theft. Whil Weatom I'm sure is a very nice guy, but...
So he can't watch what he wants to watch, blames the content providers, and just steals it instead. Weak.
The only problem is that he wasn't saying to pirate stuff he was talking DRM. He was talking about his PAID content not being accessible. He's pissed because he can't watch what he paid for when he wants to. I think that on this one, you jumped the gun and attacked without listening to what he was saying.
No I know what he was saying and I understand the distinction but it's the same argument. For example, what if back in the day I owned a VCR and a BetaMax (we did by the way). So I buy a copy of a movie on Beta because it becomes available first. Then a week later it's released on VHS. I paid for the content in a specific format. If i want it in another format, I would have to pay again. Or should I walk into target and steal the VHS version under the defense that I already paid for the content? Are you listening to what I am saying?
I know what you're trying to say but that requires putting words in his mouth for him to say it. He wasn't talking about other formats or his downloading pirate stuff. he just wanted to be able to access the stuff he pays for from the provider that he bought it from.
Imagine if all of your music, dvds, cds, and computers stopped working the moment that you departed US soil. A lot of the EULA that people sign have things about not bringing the tech or programs into other countries. They specifically say that you can't use their stuff in other countries.
Some of this is silly and it would be in their rights to totally crash your system for failure to comply to what you signed. 2 inches should mean that you lose everything you paid for. Most of the stuff in the US isn't allowed to be used oversea, so if you've ever done that you've violated the terms of your agreement.
There are terms like this in even the Windows and Apple EULAs.
What Will was saying and this was only from a media stand point. If he pays for digital content and goes through the place where he bought it, he should be allowed to view it.
Not that he should be allowed to change the format or the device it's used on. Same device. Only difference is an imaginary line.
Quote from: QuadShot on January 25, 2012, 01:08:05 PM
X, the Good Lord knows I really don't want to debate, but your last statement kind of cries for it. Yes, you have a valid point but isn't that point also why our world is suffering at the whims of Oil companies? Let's not convert to a more effecient, planet friendly fuel source because that would put so many people out of work. No more combustion engine plants, no more oil fields, oil rigs, no more gas stations, no more need for oil changes, etc. That kind of thinking is as dangerous as what you're saying progress is. I know it's difficult and yes, progress will equate to a lot of people having to seek employment elsewhere, but in the end, that progress can and will benefit the planet...We can't lean on the crutch of the past to prevent us from looking to the future...
I'm not saying that at all. What I am saying is that I can see that it's going to take a little more than flipping a switch to make everything easier. Also, let's be honest, Streaming isn't more efficient than a Bluray. When you stream you need the power to flow to your computer or tv, the router to make the connection, the power to push the signal, and then the power to run the one or more servers that give you the show. Pressing a Bluray is far cheaper than that because you need to use all that power every time you have to watch the show.
Again, I'm not saying that I agree with the delay in digital or even same day airings of over seas shows here. What I'm saying is that the picture is FAR larger than some companies having their heads up their asses and not doing it only to piss us off. We've went over the hows and whys this happens on a personal level more than a few times in this thread, but what are the global ramifications of everything? Not saying that we shouldn't do it, but isn't it better to think ahead and plan than to assume things will just be better?
Lastly, if it seems that I am on both sides of the argument, it's because I am. I'm trying to see the benefits and the flaws on both the personal and global level. There is a nice consensus that change needs to happen, but the question isn't if we are doing wrong. The question should be "What can we do to fix this without screwing everyone in the process?"
Also, in regards to changing the system, there is nothing wrong with incremental progress when jobs are on the line. I'd love there to be a new energy source, but I wouldn't want to wake up to hear that everyone that works at a gas station is out of work effective now because we found a way to use sea water as clean fuel and because of that every car on the road is now illegal for the pollutants they create.
Sure it would save the environment quicker, but we have to use a bit of foresight when trying to plan the future.
Quote from: QuadShot on January 25, 2012, 12:57:29 PM
Quote from: Jobydrone on January 25, 2012, 11:46:38 AM
Settle down, Beavis. If this issue boiled down to "stealing is wrong" then there wouldn't be so much debate going on all over the world about it. It's about alot more. You're not doing your argument any favors by name calling, being accusative, and overly simplistic.
Wow..Beavis. Not THAT's not being insulting is it?
Offense is taken, not given. It's an expression I use when I feel that someone is overreacting, not an insult.
Quote from: Jobydrone on January 25, 2012, 01:30:41 PM
Quote from: QuadShot on January 25, 2012, 12:57:29 PM
Quote from: Jobydrone on January 25, 2012, 11:46:38 AM
Settle down, Beavis. If this issue boiled down to "stealing is wrong" then there wouldn't be so much debate going on all over the world about it. It's about alot more. You're not doing your argument any favors by name calling, being accusative, and overly simplistic.
Wow..Beavis. Not THAT's not being insulting is it?
Offense is taken, not given. It's an expression I use when I feel that someone is overreacting, not an insult.
Ok...odd, but ok :)
I guess it's odd to those that aren't Beavis and Butthead fans, which I tend to forget not everyone is...even though they should be.
Joby, nah, couldn't really get into Beavis and Butthead. Not my cup of...well, anything :)
Talking about formatting issues and using the example of the Beta vs. VHS is the crux of what bothers me most about the debate. It's still illegal to rip a copy of a DVD and reformat it for viewing on your iPad, in fact you still have to download an illegal program to bypass the copy protection in order to do this. I do not see how this is different thatn taking a CD you've bought and importing it into iTunes to listen to on an iPhone and so on. I'm breaking the law and should be punished though, for wanting to watch a movie I bought and paid for on another device I bought and paid for?
Noone said that the changes are going to be easy. I'm not sure I agree with the bleak picture of lost jobs and failing businesses coming from the digital revolution. For every lost job, maybe five will be created, who knows? I know change, while inevitable, is not facilitated when people with power are fighting tooth and nail for things to stay the same.
Wowsers, talk about a thread catching on fire again...I need to re-read it again and think before I say anything, but I want to point out something:
These same companies that have fought VHS, CD, DVD, BLU-RAY and every other format that we have used under the pretense that it would increase piracy and we would lose jobs/$$. Yet amazingly, these industries are doing as well as they were doing before, if not better.
:2cents
King
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on January 25, 2012, 02:19:50 PM
Wowsers, talk about a thread catching on fire again...I need to re-read it again and think before I say anything, but I want to point out something:
These same companies that have fought VHS, CD, DVD, BLU-RAY and every other format that we have used under the pretense that it would increase piracy and we would lose jobs/$$. Yet amazingly, these industries are doing as well as they were doing before, if not better.
:2cents
King
Oh, there's little doubt that the endgame will be a profitable arrangement hopefully for both the content creators and distributors, hopefully more the creators, and be convenient and cost effective for the consumers. The one thing I can not deny regarding piracy is that impels the industry into actions which usually solve the problem for the better. But it is still stealing.
Quote from: Bryancd on January 25, 2012, 04:10:34 PM
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on January 25, 2012, 02:19:50 PM
Wowsers, talk about a thread catching on fire again...I need to re-read it again and think before I say anything, but I want to point out something:
These same companies that have fought VHS, CD, DVD, BLU-RAY and every other format that we have used under the pretense that it would increase piracy and we would lose jobs/$$. Yet amazingly, these industries are doing as well as they were doing before, if not better.
:2cents
King
Oh, there's little doubt that the endgame will be a profitable arrangement hopefully for both the content creators and distributors, hopefully more the creators, and be convenient and cost effective for the consumers. The one thing I can not deny regarding piracy is that impels the industry into actions which usually solve the problem for the better. But it is still stealing.
I agree. It is stealing.
Just going to drop this right here....
http://boingboing.net/2012/02/13/bittorrent-doesnt-hurt-us-bo.html (http://boingboing.net/2012/02/13/bittorrent-doesnt-hurt-us-bo.html)
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1986299 (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1986299)
King
Geez King, just when we thought this was dead and buried. Ok, well...here we go: the 'boingboing" story...so, the authors of the "study" are suggesting that film companies are to blame for piracy? By "lagging" the release of movies internationally, film companies are forcing people to steal copies of their movies? Huh. Sounds pretty stupid to me. So, by that mentality, let's say the iPad 3 comes out and costs $700. Gee, I can't afford $700 for a brand new iPad but I REALLY want one. Solution: steal it. Why not? Apple has made it next to impossible for me to obtain one easily. This rationalization for piracy is nonsense. I'm NOT supporting SOPA, but I AM saying that there are NO GOOD REASONS TO DOWNLOAD something illegally. Period. I don't care if you WANT to see it but it's just not playing near you. Too fraking bad. That does NOT give one the right to steal it. You know what's so funny about this whole SOPA crap? Those who are in support of piracy are saying that the film and music industries are overblowing the impact of Internet downloading. "Oh it's not significantly impacting sales". While they scream that by prosecuting pirates for stealing stuff is going to result in the total destruction of the Internet AND freedom. Uh...let's say BOTH sides are blowing things out of proportion shall we? STEALING IS STEALING IS STEALING. Period.
Quote from: KingIsaacLinksr on February 14, 2012, 05:45:13 PM
Just going to drop this right here....
http://boingboing.net/2012/02/13/bittorrent-doesnt-hurt-us-bo.html (http://boingboing.net/2012/02/13/bittorrent-doesnt-hurt-us-bo.html)
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1986299 (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1986299)
King
Yeah, major FAIL on these dude.
Who thought it was dead and buried? As long as people keep downloading illegally, and the victims of theft keep proposing outlandish, unconstitutional measures to prevent said thievery from occurring, this topic will never be dead and buried.
Joby...I meant the thread here. Not the topic in general. Sorry, I should have been more specific...er, I mean, I WAS more specific but someone pirated my post! :)
Here is the sum of it in a nutshell for me.
Piracy is illegal. Do it and risk get arrested, but don't cry about it.
Censorship to protect copyright or profit margins is wrong. Adapt to the current technology or hemorrhage some sales.
In the end, it comes down to two issues.
If you are a pirate and get busted, accept the consequences and don't whine about it.
If you are a content producer, step up to the times and make things available universally when possible or risk losing sales. Don't attempt to legislate your laziness and just do a better job of protecting your own assets.
We all know that it's illegal, but so is going even a fraction above the speed limit. Locks only keep honesty people honest and let's face it, be it piracy, speeding, riding a bike without signaling, j-walking, and tons of other little things are illegal, but we all do them to some extent.
I think that you have to look at the big picture. Piracy is not exactly like stealing as we normally see it.
It's global. It's like putting a change tray at the front of a theater and expecting everyone to pay the correct amount when people are just sneaking their friends in through the back door. Some people are moral enough to pay their way and not stick around for another show and others are going to blame the cinema for causing their own problems by not having the proper security. Or blaming them for having prices too high to buy a ticket because they added security.
So to sum it up. People suck on both sides of the issue and everyone will have their reasons for doing something that they want to do and ways to justify why they are right.
I know that Al has very personal reasons for reacting so emotionally to the articles that King linked. But I don't think that the point of the study is to rationalize stealing. It appears to be a legit examination of the effect of piracy on sales in the US and abroad. I found the bolded section very interesting and would like to read the whole thing to determine how they came to that conclusion. They're saying that based on their study, piracy has not resulted in a noticable loss of revenue inside the US, and that reducing the amount of time between US and international release could lower the rate of piracy outside the US and lower the 7% projected losses.
Personally I don't believe that reducing the window between Us and international release would do much of anything to reduce piracy, but at least it is an potential solution that doesn't involve censorship or violations of the US constitution.
Abstract:
Hollywood films are generally released first in the United States and then later abroad, with some variation in lags across films and countries. With the growth in movie piracy since the appearance of BitTorrent in 2003, films have become available through illegal piracy immediately after release in the US, while they are not available for legal viewing abroad until their foreign premieres in each country. We make use of this variation in international release lags to ask whether longer lags – which facilitate more local pre-release piracy – depress theatrical box office receipts, particularly after the widespread adoption of BitTorrent. We find that longer release windows are associated with decreased box office returns, even after controlling for film and country fixed effects. This relationship is much stronger in contexts where piracy is more prevalent: after BitTorrent's adoption and in heavily-pirated genres. Our findings indicate that, as a lower bound, international box office returns in our sample were at least 7% lower than they would have been in the absence of pre-release piracy. By contrast, we do not see evidence of elevated sales displacement in US box office revenue following the adoption of BitTorrent, and we suggest that delayed legal availability of the content abroad may drive the losses to piracy.
Quote from: X on February 15, 2012, 08:00:05 AM
Here is the sum of it in a nutshell for me.
Piracy is illegal. Do it and risk get arrested, but don't cry about it.
Censorship to protect copyright or profit margins is wrong. Adapt to the current technology or hemorrhage some sales.
In the end, it comes down to two issues.
If you are a pirate and get busted, accept the consequences and don't whine about it.
If you are a content producer, step up to the times and make things available universally when possible or risk losing sales. Don't attempt to legislate your laziness and just do a better job of protecting your own assets.
We all know that it's illegal, but so is going even a fraction above the speed limit. Locks only keep honesty people honest and let's face it, be it piracy, speeding, riding a bike without signaling, j-walking, and tons of other little things are illegal, but we all do them to some extent.
I think that you have to look at the big picture. Piracy is not exactly like stealing as we normally see it.
It's global. It's like putting a change tray at the front of a theater and expecting everyone to pay the correct amount when people are just sneaking their friends in through the back door. Some people are moral enough to pay their way and not stick around for another show and others are going to blame the cinema for causing their own problems by not having the proper security. Or blaming them for having prices too high to buy a ticket because they added security.
So to sum it up. People suck on both sides of the issue and everyone will have their reasons for doing something that they want to do and ways to justify why they are right.
X, that is without a doubt, THE best post on this topic. Amen to that buddy...
Al you an hour ago you just screamed STEALING IS STEALING IS STEALING in response to Tim's links, and then Chris posts "Piracy is not exactly like stealing as we normally see it" and you comment that it's the best post ever on the topic. What's going on here?
Quote from: Jobydrone on February 15, 2012, 08:07:15 AM
I know that Al has very personal reasons for reacting so emotionally to the articles that King linked. But I don't think that the point of the study is to rationalize stealing. It appears to be a legit examination of the effect of piracy on sales in the US and abroad. I found the bolded section very interesting and would like to read the whole thing to determine how they came to that conclusion. They're saying that based on their study, piracy has not resulted in a noticable loss of revenue inside the US, and that reducing the amount of time between US and international release could lower the rate of piracy outside the US and lower the 7% projected losses.
Personally I don't believe that reducing the window between Us and international release would do much of anything to reduce piracy, but at least it is an potential solution that doesn't involve censorship or violations of the US constitution.
Abstract:
Hollywood films are generally released first in the United States and then later abroad, with some variation in lags across films and countries. With the growth in movie piracy since the appearance of BitTorrent in 2003, films have become available through illegal piracy immediately after release in the US, while they are not available for legal viewing abroad until their foreign premieres in each country. We make use of this variation in international release lags to ask whether longer lags – which facilitate more local pre-release piracy – depress theatrical box office receipts, particularly after the widespread adoption of BitTorrent. We find that longer release windows are associated with decreased box office returns, even after controlling for film and country fixed effects. This relationship is much stronger in contexts where piracy is more prevalent: after BitTorrent's adoption and in heavily-pirated genres. Our findings indicate that, as a lower bound, international box office returns in our sample were at least 7% lower than they would have been in the absence of pre-release piracy. By contrast, we do not see evidence of elevated sales displacement in US box office revenue following the adoption of BitTorrent, and we suggest that delayed legal availability of the content abroad may drive the losses to piracy.
Joby, I did read the study and although they don't come out and say "X+Y=Z" insomuch as cause and effect, they do suggest it. And since they ARE saying that it is highly likely that the film industry is taking actions that increase the amount of illegal downloads, that IS rationalizing. How is saying that since film companies who lag their international releases (which by the way is their right) cause more illegal downloads of their products NOT rationalizing piracy? You're partially right though, reducing the lag won't do much to stop piracy, but it's NOT a potential solution to piracy. X really did sum it up very well, and I'm paraphrasing: if you're going to steal, you'll find a way to excuse it. Be it blaming the film industry for making their products too expensive or lagging the releases.
Quote from: Jobydrone on February 15, 2012, 08:18:05 AM
Al you an hour ago you just screamed STEALING IS STEALING IS STEALING in response to Tim's links, and then Chris posts "Piracy is not exactly like stealing as we normally see it" and you comment that it's the best post ever on the topic. What's going on here?
What do you mean what's going on here? Just because I say X made a great post does not in any way say I don't still view piracy as stealing, now does it? Dude, don't try to twist my statements...
"How is saying that since film companies who lag their international releases (which by the way is their right) cause more illegal downloads of their products NOT rationalizing piracy?"
What I mean is the study is not making excuses for piracy, but rather proposing an explanation for why it is occurring, at least internationally. Again, I haven't read all 28 pages but I intend to.
Quote from: QuadShot on February 15, 2012, 08:21:23 AM
Quote from: Jobydrone on February 15, 2012, 08:18:05 AM
Al you an hour ago you just screamed STEALING IS STEALING IS STEALING in response to Tim's links, and then Chris posts "Piracy is not exactly like stealing as we normally see it" and you comment that it's the best post ever on the topic. What's going on here?
What do you mean what's going on here? Just because I say X made a great post does not in any way say I don't still view piracy as stealing, now does it? Dude, don't try to twist my statements...
Sorry! Please don't misunderstand, not trying to twist anything, just trying to understand if you suddenly changed your mind on the subject.
Joby...no worries, sorry to have come off flip. No, I haven't suddenly changed my mind, I just meant that X made a great arguement on perspective. I still feel very strongly about piracy and I've stated why a few times here. And you're right that the study doesn't come out and excuse piracy. But it does suggest it. Just my view.
All cool here! I love a good spirited discussion but never want anyone to get upset or angry.
Joby...how in the world could I get angry with you, with that awesome avatar you have?! :)
Quote from: QuadShot on February 15, 2012, 08:42:20 AM
Joby...how in the world could I get angry with you, with that awesome avatar you have?! :)
Ha, I've been going through alot of them lately haven't I? I like this one too though and might keep it for a while :) My daughter and I are huge fans of Pee Wee's Playhouse. I have to remain vigilant that she doesn't ever see his original HBO special which was much more adult themed than the TV show or films.
I'm a fan of Paul myself. But you're right, his HBO special isn't very child friendly! Bit of trivia for fans of Everybody Loves Raymond: Paul Ruebens (PeeWee) was the original actor who played Robert's brother in law Peter! :)
X did a great post. Piracy is illegal but content providers should make it easier for the consumer to obtain their content legally and not restrict how they use it.
iTunes is a great example (at least for music). When their audio files were DRMed many people didn't but because they were restricted. You could only play them on a number of devices and you couldn't just move the file to a portable device etc. this got opened up and so did the purchasing floodgates. The content providers need to realise that their customers aren't the ones going around pirating and distributing their content. The people doing that didn't pay for it in the first place! It is the TV and movie producers who need to modernise now. It's happening but it's a slow process.
The other side of it is fair use. You should be able to back up your content for personal use. You should be able to use clips or exceprts of content in a creative and non profit way. (As is podcasts!) Recent legislation has tried to cover all this as a form of piracy which is wrong.
*sigh*
Well, good to see I can stir up two pages worth of debates when I'm in class. I did not link those pages to justify piracy. True, maybe I should have said something more than just put them right here. So I can clearly understand why confusion would have been raised and I apologize for making such a post without explaining the intention to you guys. It won't happen again.
The intention of those articles were legitimate studies on the actual effects of piracy which so far have been few and far between. I found it interesting that when they actually studied the effects of movie studio actions, that they found the movie studios can have an effect on piracy. Both positive and negative. It just goes to show that companies have more power over piracy than they care to admit. The intention of the article is study how you can combat piracy with piracy still being available, which lets face it. Piracy will always exist in one form or the other. It has for the past two thousand years. But getting more knowledge about why people pirate can help studios and companies figure out ways to combat it.
I think learning from the past events with Megaupload and such that breaking the constitution is not the way of combating piracy.
@Al, the article never said that people are being forced to pirate. But they are more likely to choose piracy rather than waiting. Which is sadly, human nature for the most part. I, on the other hand, have decided to simply exercise patience for it to show up on Netflix.
My 2cents.
-King