I just bought my favorite movie of all time ...

[akiratubo]

[Jack]

The one I really hate is on the Banacek DVD's.  Not just a piracy warning, but a little vignette with two guys, one of whom has a pirated copy of a some movie, the other who has stolen a car.  Same thing, you know.  For one thing, it's a horrible and utterly inaccurate analogy, for another thing it's stupid, lasts a while, and of course it cannot be skipped.  Why the hell do they put this crap on DVD's?  I obviously bought your damned DVD, otherwise I wouldn't be seeing this. 

[lester1/2jr]

I rent these DVD's from the phillpenes where you cannot fast forward through the 10 minute ad, it's insane.  one indian company has their logo on the screen for the entire movie.  it's also insane

[Frogger]

Downloading films is just like ripping out a human heart!!!!!!

Seriously PC games have gone the same way with spore being the most pirated game of 2008 due to the activation anti piracy crap. Basically you rent the game if the server goes down or it counts itself installed onto 5 computers it will stop working. When I say 5 computers, a hardware upgrade can trigger it to add one to the count. Over a few years it could decide it been installed 5 times and just stop working. Meaning you have to buy a new copy. All this anti piracy is doing is killing the 2nd hand market.

Now enough of the more serious forms of anti piracy being used on software.

Do the adverts work on anyone? Seriously I fail to see how downloading a copy of a file is equal to stealing a car. I am half expecting them to claim it funds gangs, drugs and terrorism. (I say only half I checked out one anti piracy website which claimed all 3)

Now to brighten the mood.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=d82Lq2rVB_4
	Small | Large

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=OWPfcEOr2Yg
	Small | Large

[Rev. Powell]

I agree that the ads are crazy, since by definition they only get placed on legitimate copies.  And I hate anything on DVD that can't be skipped, including Dolby ads, copyright notices, the distributor's own logo and sometimes even pre-menu sequences that go on to long.

But I have to take exception to the attitude behind the statement "I fail to see how downloading a copy of a file is equal to stealing a car."  True, it's not as serious as stealing a car, but it is equal to stealing a DVD.  It's a difference of quantity, but not of quality.  Stealing 20 dollars isn't the same as stealing 5,000 dollars, but they are both stealing. 

Piracy is a serious problem and I don't know how it can ever be addressed.  Obviously ads don't work.  Obviously the RIAA's strategy of suing little fish has turned public opinion against enforcing copyrights.  I can't think of a strategy that will convince people that piracy is morally wrong.  It's just too easy to download pirated stuff for free, it doesn't feel like stealing because you don't have to sneak around, cut alarm wires and wear a ski mask.  People also have a depressing capacity to convince themselves that what they're doing isn't wrong when it feels good.

I know I'm in the minority on this, but it bugs the hell out of me.  The people trying to keep freeloaders from taking their hard work without compensation are viewed as the bad guys, while the people selfishly taking whatever they want without paying for it are given a free pass. 

[Frogger]

But I have to take exception to the attitude behind the statement "I fail to see how downloading a copy of a file is equal to stealing a car."  True, it's not as serious as stealing a car, but it is equal to stealing a DVD.  It's a difference of quantity, but not of quality.  Stealing 20 dollars isn't the same as stealing 5,000 dollars, but they are both stealing.

It is not equal to stealing a DVD all you are receiving is a clone of a file. I refuse to see this as stealing and to be fair when I saw Spore was so heavily pirated (even before release as it was leaked) I let out a cheer. What took place on a lot of the recent PC games sent a direct message about the anti piracy BS protection now on games. The only victim is a large company who aim is to max out profit, the music industry is a prime example when they where failing to stop downloading they came out with legal downloading. Cheap and safe downloading, it would be excellent to see some legal movie downloads.

Saying that I still prefer dvds which is why I crawl through online bargin bins to expand my collection. I have no issues with people downloading and many ways I see it as a good thing in the case of the recent developments in the PC games industry.

 

Piracy is a serious problem and I don't know how it can ever be addressed.  Obviously ads don't work.  Obviously the RIAA's strategy of suing little fish has turned public opinion against enforcing copyrights.  I can't think of a strategy that will convince people that piracy is morally wrong.  It's just too easy to download pirated stuff for free, it doesn't feel like stealing because you don't have to sneak around, cut alarm wires and wear a ski mask.  People also have a depressing capacity to convince themselves that what they're doing isn't wrong when it feels good.

Well lets first focus on the morally wrong part, morals are subjective. I do not see it as morally wrong for people to pirate its their own PC they are putting at risk from virus's and spyware.

Again it very subjective I do not consider it wrong for people to do this its not really comparable to running around stealing from peoples homes.

I know I'm in the minority on this, but it bugs the hell out of me.  The people trying to keep freeloaders from taking their hard work without compensation are viewed as the bad guys, while the people selfishly taking whatever they want without paying for it are given a free pass. 

There are many worse things than piracy. Its not like their actions hurt you in anyway except the stupid anti piracy protection and ads.

Lets try and put this in prospective.

According to UNICEF, 26,500-30,000 children die each day due to poverty.

[dean]

There are many worse things than piracy. Its not like their actions hurt you in anyway except the stupid anti piracy protection and ads.

Yarrrrrrrrr!

That's the spirit, 'they can't catch me, so nerts to them!'

Yes pirating a dvd is a copy of a file that you never owned, and therefore, legally speaking, tis piracy and illegal.

To say that the only victim is the 'large companies' is plainly idiotic.  I've talked to musicians, some reasonably well known here, who have openly complained to me that none of the little people can make any money selling records anymore because it's so easy to just download their music.  If they're big enough they make do, but when you used to be able to eke out a modest living being an average, lesser known artist/musician, now you can only make your money touring, and not everyone has the ability to tour for 11 months of the year.

People are affected, the whole 'big corporation' bollocks is just trying to justify something that is illegal.

I partake in illegal activity, whether it be the occasional jaywalk or downloading music etc, but if I created something, poured my heart and soul into it, darn it I'd want to get paid.

[Rev. Powell]

First, thanks to Dean for backing me up.  The reason I oppose piracy so strongly is because I'm on the side of the creator, not the consumer.

No disrespect intended, Mr. P, but I think all your arguments were covered by my statement "People also have a depressing capacity to convince themselves that what they're doing isn't wrong when it feels good."

We don't have some basic human right to be entertained that evil capitalists infringe by charging prices higher than we would like, or including anti-pirtacy features that we don't happen to like. 

Not that I'm immune to rationalization.  I made illegal copies of stuff when I was younger, and I don't think I'm going to hell for it.  I made arguments to myself similar to the ones you're making now, but I eventually realized I wasn't being honest with myself.  I realized that I took that stuff only because I wanted it to satisfy my selfish urge to be entertained.  My only ethical defense could be "It's OK for me to do whatever I want", and I'm incapable of adopting that as a princinciple to live by.

Lets try and put this in prospective.

According to UNICEF, 26,500-30,000 children die each day due to poverty.

I am putting it in perspective.  To my way of thinking, saying that because a social problem is less serious than child poverty it should be ignored is putting things in a skewed perspective. 

[Frogger]

 I've talked to musicians, some reasonably well known here, who have openly complained to me that none of the little people can make any money selling records anymore because it's so easy to just download their music.

Musicians make most of their money from tours. However small musicians are heavily reliant from money from Cd's.

Again the only way to really stop downloading is to provide safe legal downloads which are cheap so it outways the illegal free risk of virus or spyware methods. Change is required to keep up with modern technology.

[Psycho Circus]

Alot of bands have to sell well to be able to even fund getting out on the road for a decent tour. They have to then make a decent amount to pay themselves and then have money available to afford getting back into to the studio. It's not like the old days at all and I believe music is sufferring because of it. Everyone seems to be obsessed with flash in the pan crap that has 3 seconds of melody they like until they get bored and move on to something else just because their Ipod can hold even more crap. This is why all the good metal bands always tour scandinavian Europe more than anywhere else. There's still a market there and they make the most money to be able to keep putting albums out.

I'll admit I've downloaded music, but it's one song here and there from 20-30 years ago and then I usually buy the album anyway. Like the old days, you here a song, it's great, but you wait a month or two for the album, it sells well, you go to the big arena tour and everyone goes home happy. Those days are long gone, that's why I'm heading out to every arena show I can get to. They will fade away, as they won't get filled like they used to, 90% of artists around today will not have a career lasting 30-40 years like the Rolling Stones or KISS. Some are lucky they get 2-3, because they are garbage and there is too many forms of media overkill for the masses of idiots with no taste. 

[Frogger]

A lot of bands have to sell well to be able to even fund getting out on the road for a decent tour. They have to then make a decent amount to pay themselves and then have money available to afford getting back into to the studio. It's not like the old days at all and I believe music is sufferring because of it. Everyone seems to be obsessed with flash in the pan crap that has 3 seconds of melody they like until they get bored and move on to something else just because their Ipod can hold even more crap. This is why all the good metal bands always tour scandinavian Europe more than anywhere else. There's still a market there and they make the most money to be able to keep putting albums out.

I'll admit I've downloaded music, but it's one song here and there from 20-30 years ago and then I usually buy the album anyway. Like the old days, you here a song, it's great, but you wait a month or two for the album, it sells well, you go to the big arena tour and everyone goes home happy. Those days are long gone, that's why I'm heading out to every arena show I can get to. They will fade away, as they won't get filled like they used to, 90% of artists around today will not have a career lasting 30-40 years like the Rolling Stones or KISS. Some are lucky they get 2-3, because they are garbage and there is too many forms of media overkill for the masses of idiots with no taste. 

The main solution would be to move with the times. Selling cheap music downloads would allow a wider audience buy their music.

How ever I do agree with you but the main music I listen to is alternative stuff for example anti flag, the international noise conspiracy and no respect. Which I happily pay for their albums if I feel the need to expand my music collection.

I also agree that most the main stream stuff is mass produced rubbish which I can not stand. (most new movies for example)

I watched a film by an independent group on a low budget called Sex and Blood nightmare which gave me the wonderful 'WTF' feeling that only some of the best B movies give me. Sex scenes with some very gory deaths all loosely following a plot that a ghost has come back to kill which he does lots off until hes ummmm killed by his reflection. Awful film but very funny from a plot and script point of view.

[dean]

I definitely agree with the fact that we need a better way to help support the music scene online.  Cheap downloads exist but I assume it's hard to get universal agreement with all the big studios about charges etc.  The reality is, though, even with Legal downloads available, it is sooooo easy to download music without consequence and alot of people, myself at times included, just won't care: if you can get it for free, then why bother paying for it?

It's a tough one.  Looking at the future, and the only way at the moment I see illegal downloads getting curbed in a big way is for the goverment and ISPs to take a much tighter grip on the internet, and I don't like the idea of that at all.

[Nukie 2]

Theres always been this problem of piracy!
Bootlegs, tax on blank audio tapes. Radio shows in the 1970s used to play whole records of bands and people would sit by their stereos and record. American Hardcore groups of the late 70's early 80's used to be full of bravado if their record or show was bootlegged around the country.

I dunno what to think really. If you're an underground musician or a b-movie maker, you can't expect to make money out of what your doing, or even make a living out of it. You'd be lucky to make a living out of it. You're in it for the love of it; to be an alternative form of media.
In my expirience these artists all say different things. Some tell me its totally cool to bootleg; others say it's evil; they're not consistent, how can they expect their audience to be?
If you want to make money off it, you sell-out and change your art, and sign contracts with evil companies who you hate; who you previously bought recording equipment from-- now you endorse it!

Here's another thing, Sony, and other media companies sell us gear knowlingly that we can use it to duplicate productions-- yet we are told not to by the same people. Everyone has business dealings with eachother; it's all hypocritical and round-about. The only thing that makes sense to me is to not copy stuff and turn around and sell it, because it doesn't benefit the artist or it's distributor.

What about buying used copies of media? This doesn't benefit the artist, but it's not illegal. However, It doesn't even add more wealth to the GDP.

What about the case with most old b-movies? I'm sure distributors like Millcreek or Alpha Video just wrote the producers of the movies a check to buy rights to their replication, and that the producers don't make any money off the sales. Maybe even the distributors bought the rights off other distributors. How about the actors and the production crew? The were probably given checks (if that) during or after production.

It's all a chain of dealings; woe to they who are the weakest link and get the worst deal.

[Rev. Powell]

What about buying used copies of media? This doesn't benefit the artist, but it's not illegal. However, It doesn't even add more wealth to the GDP.

What about the case with most old b-movies? I'm sure distributors like Millcreek or Alpha Video just wrote the producers of the movies a check to buy rights to their replication, and that the producers don't make any money off the sales. Maybe even the distributors bought the rights off other distributors. How about the actors and the production crew? The were probably given checks (if that) during or after production.

It's all a chain of dealings; woe to they who are the weakest link and get the worst deal.

Selling used copies is legal under a practical legal rule called the "first sale doctrine."  It would be illegal to make a copy to keep for yourself and then sell the original.  Secondhand sales do add some wealth to the GDP; when I sell you my used copy of BLOODSUCKING VIXENS FROM VENUS for $5 I get money that I wouldn't have had otherwise, which I then spend on a delicious bottle of Thunderbird wine (yum!) that I otherwise wouldn't have bought. If I copy my DVD and trade it to you for your copy of THE GORE-GORE GIRLS, then there is no increase in GDP. 

Don't know about Alpha Video, but Mill Creek uses public domain movies so they don't have to pay anyone.  That's not a bad thing; it's absolutely a good thing.  The producers got their chance to make their money during the movie's original run, now it belongs to the public and anyone can copy it.  I think things should fall into the public domain much more quickly than they do currently.  Industry lobbyists have gotten the length of copyright extended beyond all reason. 

Most actors, and all production crew, get paid a flat fee for their work and don't get royalties.  Some actors and directors have enough pull to get a share of the back end residuals. Often they still get little or nothing, because most films aren't profitable.  The 10% of movies that are hits subsidize the other 90% that lose money.

Musicians (other than "session" musicians) are different; they may depend on royalties for an income stream.

[Nukie 2]

Selling used copies is legal under a practical legal rule called the "first sale doctrine."  It would be illegal to make a copy to keep for yourself and then sell the original. Secondhand sales do add some wealth to the GDP; when I sell you my used copy of BLOODSUCKING VIXENS FROM VENUS for $5 I get money that I wouldn't have had otherwise, which I then spend on a delicious bottle of Thunderbird wine (yum!) that I otherwise wouldn't have bought.

But you prevented someone from buying a new copy. On a wider scale you decreased the demand for reproductions, and slackened hiring for that firm.
No new wealth was brought into the economy, instead more was paid on the same DVD and the money circulated into a different area.

Most actors, and all production crew, get paid a flat fee for their work and don't get royalties.  Some actors and directors have enough pull to get a share of the back end residuals. Often they still get little or nothing, because most films aren't profitable.  The 10% of movies that are hits subsidize the other 90% that lose money.

In most cases it's the distributors who are being ripped-off, not the production crew or actors. But a different distributor will sell me blank disks, and I can burn copies.

Musicians (other than "session" musicians) are different; they may depend on royalties for an income stream.

I overlooked independent record labels. Theres also indepedent movie companies like Troma. The problem with these guys is that they dont always have the money to issue reprints so I'd have to pay more for a used copy than new. Then what's the difference if I burn a copy from my friends; or buy from some douche off amazon whose I stuff I may never recieve from, or get a scuffed up copy?

If these labels or companies did have copies available, I totally buy. But I know that the artists do have a day job. It would be great if they could quit their day jobs and make artwork, so ours jobs are more bearable-- but it's unlikely. Also,  I don't feel like I'm fully enjoying the product if it's a burned-copy.