Bad Movie Logo
"A website to the detriment of good film"
Custom Search
HOMEB-MOVIE REVIEWSREADER REVIEWSFORUMINTERVIEWSUPDATESABOUT
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:53:31 PM
713368 Posts in 53058 Topics by 7725 Members
Latest Member: wibwao
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Bad Movies  |  I just bought my favorite movie of all time ... « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Author Topic: I just bought my favorite movie of all time ...  (Read 16088 times)
Rev. Powell
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 3100
Posts: 26772


Click on that globe for 366 Weird Movies


WWW
« Reply #15 on: January 01, 2009, 02:59:03 PM »

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.

True, but only IF the buyer would have paid for a new copy had no used copy been available.  I'll pay $5 for a used copy of the GORE-GORE GIRLS, but I wouldn't pay $20 for a brand new copy, because I don't want to see it that much.  There are some people who value the DVD enough to buy it new.  There are others who wouldn't buy a new copy even if one were available; they'd just spend their money on something else.  So, if you buy G-G G for $20 and resell it to me for $5 later, together we've injected $25 into the economy instead of $20.  The secondhand market helps to maximize the wealth created by the original product because it captures the value assigned to the product by both of us.       

The same theory applies to rentals.  Netflix adds lots of value to the economy because they squeeze money out of renters who wouldn't pay to buy a copy anyway.

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.

It's a good point in an economic sense, if not an ethical sense, that those who make the hardware and software that assist people to make illegal reproductions add some value to the economy. 

The cheaper it is for people to make and utilize reproductions, however, the less wealth is created.  Someone who watches a commercially available movie on youtube on their mom's computer is a total leech off the economy; they don't even add the value that would be created by buying a pirated copy.   

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.

I don't think it's really a question of independent vs. major label in the recording industry.  Any label will advance money to the recording artist to pay for the costs of producing, advertising, and distributing the CD, and a little something for the artists as well.  If the album sells well the company makes its money back (which rarely happens).  If it actually makes a profit, then the label splits part of that profit with the artist in the form of royalties.  Moviemaking operates on similar principles. 

What's the difference in the three scenarios you propose?  In the first, you do something illegal and (in my opinion) immoral that gets you what you want.  In the second two, you do the right thing from a societal perspective, but through bad luck you end up getting screwed personally. 

I'll add that I think it's far less objectionable to make copies of things that are truly OOP and otherwise unavailable, and that the copyright holder shows no signs of exploiting, then it is to copy the latest CD that you could easily buy at Wallmart.   

Anyway, I'm impressed with your method of analysis.  You ask good questions and raise some good points.       
Logged

I'll take you places the hand of man has not yet set foot...
Andrew
Administrator
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 0
Posts: 8457


I know where my towel is.


WWW
« Reply #16 on: January 01, 2009, 03:39:20 PM »

Buying a used copy might deprive a copyright holder of a new sale, but I detest the idea of entertainment (movies, music, etc) as a subscription.  If I buy a film, I want to own the film to watch it whenever I want - for no additional charge.  I do not want it to stop working after 5 viewings or 15 days, and I do not want it to stop working because a central authentication server goes offline. 

Part of this is what I think the consumer should expect from artists and studios.  The other is from an archival standpoint.  DVD is a boon for the preservation of films in some form.  What better way to ensure that a film is never lost than to distribute thousands of copies across the world?  Imagine if all those discs self destructed, or relied on a server run by a company that could go bankrupt or decide that operating the server was no longer profitable.

So far the world has resisted the push by studios and distributors to move to that subscription model.  DIVX discs died.  However, quite a bit of online music is still only available in DRM formats.  In the realm of video games, it seems that most players have surrendered to DRM.

My take on it is that the best way to enforce your (the consumer's) will upon the companies is not to buy these stupid DRM-restricted versions, and do not use infringing copies of the movie/music/software either.  Believe me, their need to make money will break before your need to play the game would.  Or, at least, it should.

Copyright infringement is not stealing, it is copyright infringement.  It is a violation of the offer that society extends to artists and those who make creative works.
Logged

Andrew Borntreger
Badmovies.org
Frogger
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 14
Posts: 214


« Reply #17 on: January 01, 2009, 04:12:21 PM »

Buying a used copy might deprive a copyright holder of a new sale, but I detest the idea of entertainment (movies, music, etc) as a subscription.  If I buy a film, I want to own the film to watch it whenever I want - for no additional charge.  I do not want it to stop working after 5 viewings or 15 days, and I do not want it to stop working because a central authentication server goes offline. 

Part of this is what I think the consumer should expect from artists and studios.  The other is from an archival standpoint.  DVD is a boon for the preservation of films in some form.  What better way to ensure that a film is never lost than to distribute thousands of copies across the world?  Imagine if all those discs self destructed, or relied on a server run by a company that could go bankrupt or decide that operating the server was no longer profitable.

So far the world has resisted the push by studios and distributors to move to that subscription model.  DIVX discs died.  However, quite a bit of online music is still only available in DRM formats.  In the realm of video games, it seems that most players have surrendered to DRM.

My take on it is that the best way to enforce your (the consumer's) will upon the companies is not to buy these stupid DRM-restricted versions, and do not use infringing copies of the movie/music/software either.  Believe me, their need to make money will break before your need to play the game would.  Or, at least, it should.

Copyright infringement is not stealing, it is copyright infringement.  It is a violation of the offer that society extends to artists and those who make creative works.

 Cheers

DRM restrictions are insane. Hopefully the poor sales in the PC game industry will cause the to rethink their current actions. Saying that the games I keep replaying are dungeon keeper and Doom both the games are very old but very enjoyable. If they just stopped working as the server proving they where original copies went down I would be most upset. Saying that both of the games are 2nd or 3rd copies as I keep having to burn new copies changing files where needed for compatibility with the lastest windows version.

I agree it is copyright infringement nothing more. Remember folks its good to be bad.
Logged

"We think too small, like the frog at the bottom of the well. He thinks the sky is only as big as the top of the well. If he surfaced, he would have an entirely different view."Mao. "At the risk of seeming ridiculous, let me say that the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love. It is impossible to think of a genuine revolutionary lacking this quality." Ernesto Che Guevara. "A lie told often enough becomes the truth" Lenin. "Religion is the opium of the masses." Marx.
Andrew
Administrator
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 0
Posts: 8457


I know where my towel is.


WWW
« Reply #18 on: January 01, 2009, 04:22:08 PM »

I agree it is copyright infringement nothing more. Remember folks its good to be bad.

I disagree with this, as copyright provides a reason for the creation of artistic works.  If a company does not have a chance to profit by creating a game, then why in the world should they spend years and millions of dollars developing a game.  The same goes for movies and music.
Logged

Andrew Borntreger
Badmovies.org
Rev. Powell
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 3100
Posts: 26772


Click on that globe for 366 Weird Movies


WWW
« Reply #19 on: January 01, 2009, 04:26:21 PM »


My take on it is that the best way to enforce your (the consumer's) will upon the companies is not to buy these stupid DRM-restricted versions, and do not use infringing copies of the movie/music/software either.  Believe me, their need to make money will break before your need to play the game would.  Or, at least, it should.


Exactly.


Copyright infringement is not stealing, it is copyright infringement.  It is a violation of the offer that society extends to artists and those who make creative works.

A rare point of disagreement with you here, though it's probably just an issue of semantics.  There's a reason it's called intellectual "property."  The offer that society extended to the artists is the exclusive right to sell copies of their original works; that's a legal property right.  There's also a moral property right to reap the fruits of your own labor.  Taking someone's property without permission/compensation is stealing.  

When some guy copies one of your reviews and posts it on his blog as if it was his own, you wouldn't be out of line to say he "stole" your work.  I would consider it calling a spade a spade, in fact.  
Logged

I'll take you places the hand of man has not yet set foot...
Frogger
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 14
Posts: 214


« Reply #20 on: January 01, 2009, 04:29:56 PM »

I agree it is copyright infringement nothing more. Remember folks its good to be bad.

I disagree with this, as copyright provides a reason for the creation of artistic works.  If a company does not have a chance to profit by creating a game, then why in the world should they spend years and millions of dollars developing a game.  The same goes for movies and music.

I agree copyright is worth having but its still not stealing.

The good to be bad part came from dungeon keeper if you ever played that. (Shame DK3 was cut)
Logged

"We think too small, like the frog at the bottom of the well. He thinks the sky is only as big as the top of the well. If he surfaced, he would have an entirely different view."Mao. "At the risk of seeming ridiculous, let me say that the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love. It is impossible to think of a genuine revolutionary lacking this quality." Ernesto Che Guevara. "A lie told often enough becomes the truth" Lenin. "Religion is the opium of the masses." Marx.
Andrew
Administrator
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 0
Posts: 8457


I know where my towel is.


WWW
« Reply #21 on: January 01, 2009, 04:37:55 PM »

Quote
Copyright infringement is not stealing, it is copyright infringement.  It is a violation of the offer that society extends to artists and those who make creative works.

A rare point of disagreement with you here, though it's probably just an issue of semantics.  There's a reason it's called intellectual "property."  The offer that society extended to the artists is the exclusive right to sell copies of their original works; that's a legal property right.  There's also a moral property right to reap the fruits of your own labor.  Taking someone's property without permission/compensation is stealing.  

When some guy copies one of your reviews and posts it on his blog as if it was his own, you wouldn't be out of line to say he "stole" your work.  I would consider it calling a spade a spade, in fact.  

I would argue that it is technically not stealing, though I agree using stealing for a shorthand version works.  If someone steals my car, I no longer have a car to get to work or go to the grocery store.  If I make a game and they make an infringing copy, I am potentially out the revenue I would have earned if they bought the game but I still have the game to sell.

Copyright infringement is wrong, but it is has some differences that make it a separate issue than stealing.
Logged

Andrew Borntreger
Badmovies.org
Jim H
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 314
Posts: 3669



« Reply #22 on: January 01, 2009, 04:56:53 PM »

Quote from: Andrew
In the realm of video games, it seems that most players have surrendered to DRM.

PC games, yeah.  It's gotten rather ridiculous.  Personally, as one example, Half-Life 2 REQUIRED online activation before it would work.  I was unwilling to buy the game (despite owning the first and loving it and its multiplayer mods) until some hacker out there got a workaround to the online activation.  Once they did, I bought it.  I'd say I'm rather exceptional in this regard though - and that CD keys and online activation probably does reduce some amount of casual piracy.  Probably not a lot though.
Logged
Frogger
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 14
Posts: 214


« Reply #23 on: January 01, 2009, 05:14:48 PM »

Quote from: Andrew
In the realm of video games, it seems that most players have surrendered to DRM.

PC games, yeah.  It's gotten rather ridiculous.  Personally, as one example, Half-Life 2 REQUIRED online activation before it would work.  I was unwilling to buy the game (despite owning the first and loving it and its multiplayer mods) until some hacker out there got a workaround to the online activation.  Once they did, I bought it.  I'd say I'm rather exceptional in this regard though - and that CD keys and online activation probably does reduce some amount of casual piracy.  Probably not a lot though.

Pirates quickly get round anything like that. The DRM games have been heavily pirated. The only harm DRM and CD keys do is damage the 2nd hand market.

Lets take spore as an example. Pirates managed to get a copy and hack it before the official release day. So not only did the pirates get a better version of the game they also got it before legit customers.
Logged

"We think too small, like the frog at the bottom of the well. He thinks the sky is only as big as the top of the well. If he surfaced, he would have an entirely different view."Mao. "At the risk of seeming ridiculous, let me say that the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love. It is impossible to think of a genuine revolutionary lacking this quality." Ernesto Che Guevara. "A lie told often enough becomes the truth" Lenin. "Religion is the opium of the masses." Marx.
Nukie 2
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 121
Posts: 1141


I did it all for the...


WWW
« Reply #24 on: January 01, 2009, 08:54:50 PM »

 What about pirating in Iran?
There anything western is illegal, and the only way a bored Iranian can get ahold of Shakiras newest CD is through the black market.

What do we all say in this scenerio?
Logged


Watch Nukie on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wab1Y713tN0
"Like" International Fans of the Movie Nukie and Sias Odendaal on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/International-Fans-of-the-Movie-Nukie-and-Sias-Odendaal/135820159771783
Andrew
Administrator
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 0
Posts: 8457


I know where my towel is.


WWW
« Reply #25 on: January 01, 2009, 09:15:29 PM »

What about pirating in Iran?
There anything western is illegal, and the only way a bored Iranian can get ahold of Shakiras newest CD is through the black market.

What do we all say in this scenerio?

That people have to buy Western music CDs on the black market has nothing to do with copyright.  Also, Iran is not signed to the Berne Convention, which is an international agreement covering copyrights. 
Logged

Andrew Borntreger
Badmovies.org
Rev. Powell
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 3100
Posts: 26772


Click on that globe for 366 Weird Movies


WWW
« Reply #26 on: January 02, 2009, 12:52:59 PM »

Quote
Copyright infringement is not stealing, it is copyright infringement.  It is a violation of the offer that society extends to artists and those who make creative works.

A rare point of disagreement with you here, though it's probably just an issue of semantics.  There's a reason it's called intellectual "property."  The offer that society extended to the artists is the exclusive right to sell copies of their original works; that's a legal property right.  There's also a moral property right to reap the fruits of your own labor.  Taking someone's property without permission/compensation is stealing.  

When some guy copies one of your reviews and posts it on his blog as if it was his own, you wouldn't be out of line to say he "stole" your work.  I would consider it calling a spade a spade, in fact.  

I would argue that it is technically not stealing, though I agree using stealing for a shorthand version works.  If someone steals my car, I no longer have a car to get to work or go to the grocery store.  If I make a game and they make an infringing copy, I am potentially out the revenue I would have earned if they bought the game but I still have the game to sell.

Copyright infringement is wrong, but it is has some differences that make it a separate issue than stealing.

As I thought, it's sematics.  "Stealing" is not a legal term--you can't be charged with stealing.  "Larceny" is a legal term, and it requires that the victim be deprived of the property.  Copyright infringement (and other forms of lifting intellectual property) can't meet this definition.  The effect on the the victim is less serious.

But looking at it from the point of the perpetrator, it's the same class of activity.  He's taking something that belongs to another person without a legal right or justification.  It's the same sort of selfish act that shows an unwillingness to delay gratification or discipline our own desires.  It's morally weak.

The reason I prefer to call it "stealing" is because society is far too tolerant of this type of selfish activity, and people need a reminder that it actually is something that's wrong.  The fact that so many people think it's perfectly OK makes me worry about both our national character and our critical thinking skills.  "Infringement," while precise, is an emotionally weak term that's far too easy to wink at or rationalize.     

But I do admit that this is as much a personal pet peeve of mine as anything.   Wink
Logged

I'll take you places the hand of man has not yet set foot...
Rev. Powell
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 3100
Posts: 26772


Click on that globe for 366 Weird Movies


WWW
« Reply #27 on: January 02, 2009, 12:56:06 PM »

What about pirating in Iran?
There anything western is illegal, and the only way a bored Iranian can get ahold of Shakiras newest CD is through the black market.

What do we all say in this scenerio?

It's a much different question.  If you value free expression as a basic human right, as most of us here do, then Iranian censorship laws are illegitimate.  But you can smuggle in legitimate copies of Shakira CDs, right?  Not really related to piracy.
Logged

I'll take you places the hand of man has not yet set foot...
Nukie 2
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 121
Posts: 1141


I did it all for the...


WWW
« Reply #28 on: January 02, 2009, 01:35:18 PM »

Some of the logic doesn't follow:
It's legal to buy a used copy, even though the artist doesn't benefit. Let's say in most cases new copies are available, yet buying used is chosen because the buyer doesn't value the disc at $20.00. However it's frowned upon if someone burns a copy for their own collection?

Burning shouldn't be equated with piracy; the person isn't selling copies on the black market.

I'm sorry to say this, but it's really the fault of the owner if they don't sell a product that can actively prevent people from making copies.
You've got to be responsible for your own property. Just like you don't leave your doors and windows unlocked!


Logged


Watch Nukie on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wab1Y713tN0
"Like" International Fans of the Movie Nukie and Sias Odendaal on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/International-Fans-of-the-Movie-Nukie-and-Sias-Odendaal/135820159771783
jimmybob
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 42
Posts: 352


Move over, let Jimi take over.


« Reply #29 on: January 02, 2009, 02:26:52 PM »



-Jimmybob
Logged

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Bad Movies  |  I just bought my favorite movie of all time ... « previous next »
    Jump to:  


    RSS Feed Subscribe Subscribe by RSS
    Email Subscribe Subscribe by Email


    Popular Articles
    How To Find A Bad Movie

    The Champions of Justice

    Plan 9 from Outer Space

    Manos, The Hands of Fate

    Podcast: Todd the Convenience Store Clerk

    Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

    Dragonball: The Magic Begins

    Cool As Ice

    The Educational Archives: Driver's Ed

    Godzilla vs. Monster Zero

    Do you have a zombie plan?

    FROM THE BADMOVIES.ORG ARCHIVES
    ImageThe Giant Claw - Slime drop

    Earth is visited by a GIANT ANTIMATTER SPACE BUZZARD! Gawk at the amazingly bad bird puppet, or chuckle over the silly dialog. This is one of the greatest b-movies ever made.

    Lesson Learned:
    • Osmosis: os·mo·sis (oz-mo'sis, os-) n., 1. When a bird eats something.

    Subscribe to Badmovies.org and get updates by email:

    HOME B-Movie Reviews Reader Reviews Forum Interviews TV Shows Advertising Information Sideshows Links Contact

    Badmovies.org is owned and operated by Andrew Borntreger. All original content is © 1998 - 2014 by its respective author(s). Image, video, and audio files are used in accordance with the Fair Use Law, and are property of the film copyright holders. You may freely link to any page (.html or .php) on this website, but reproduction in any other form must be authorized by the copyright holder.