EPTThe diversity and the access is much better today than it was before the internet. Since people can listen to any amount of music for free they aren't limited to experiencing what they have heard at their friends house or on the radio. You don't need to pay big bucks to explore new kinds of music and diversify your music taste. Many artists thrive from file sharing releasing many if not all songs online and thereby getting more fans who buy their merchandise and pay to come to their concerts which is anyway where artist earn most of their money today.
[Movie] Steal this film - Page 3
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
|
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
The diversity and the access is much better today than it was before the internet. Since people can listen to any amount of music for free they aren't limited to experiencing what they have heard at their friends house or on the radio. You don't need to pay big bucks to explore new kinds of music and diversify your music taste. Many artists thrive from file sharing releasing many if not all songs online and thereby getting more fans who buy their merchandise and pay to come to their concerts which is anyway where artist earn most of their money today. | ||
|
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
People don't stop buying bottles water just because they can get it for free at home. Look at applications like photoshop. No sane private person would buy a license for photoshop but the developers of photoshop still earn lots of money from people downloading it. Since basically everyone who uses computers and are into art know how to use the program, once they get a job they will ask their boss for a license. Private use of professional programs are good for everyone. I don't think it should be legal to make money of of other peoples work but I think that the laws for copyright need to be changed to adapt to the world we live in today. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10503 Posts
On October 04 2008 08:37 Ace wrote: "the industry should just adapt" and how are they going to do that? Console games can't, musicians can't, and most videogames that are not MMOs or FPS can't. Pay attention. Entertainment industries that are victims of piracy are supposed to throw in the towel and explore opportunities for clean and renewable energy. The central United States is a hot bed for unharvested wind energy that could help us break our dependency on foreign oil. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
Software companies don't all just say "Ok, they are going to pirate our stuff anyway, so let's just upload it to bittorent". Free software in itself is another neverending topic of crazy stuff (Open Source development). | ||
|
tec27
United States3700 Posts
On October 04 2008 09:56 IntoTheWow wrote: On the contrary, internet and free download have given lots of unknown artists a way to show their work that otherwise would have gone trough the filter or music companies. I think he meant "unknown" as in "signed, but not very popular." But, his point is still wrong. Artists that aren't very popular generally make absolutely nothing from record sales, as their contracts require that money to be used to pay for things like studios and producers they used to make the record in the first place. So unless an artist sells a lot of copies, they're not going to see a dime of that anyway. | ||
|
sqwert
United States781 Posts
| ||
|
haduken
Australia8267 Posts
Personally i think a big part of the piracy problem has to do with the culture of today's society. I know people in Asia and some part of the Western world wouldn't give a second thought for downloading stuff without paying. However, Piracy in Japan is almost non-existent because a combination of their culture of no doing anything to harm others and a strict policy and DRM protected materials (be they porn, music blah blah). As a consumer, i will go after what ever is cheapest and most convenient for me to shop. A lot of people who pirate belong to my generation who should be around about 20ish in age and will own credit card etc. I still don't understand why it is so difficult to get stuff from the internet legally. The only option is iTune which doesn't work for my linux box. It doesn't make sense for the consumer to pay twice as much as some one else just because he happens to live in a different country. I have to pay double the price for a steam ID compare to some one in the US. I have to pay more for legal mp3 tunes and i don't get the same selection as people in US. I mean wtf? i understand market segmentation and all that BS economic crap. But we live in the I.T age where resources are conveniently available so what's the point of having this old business model of dividing consumers? I would pay for my music, porn, games. I'm not rich but i will pay for them but i expect they to be 1. Good quality, at least the same quality as the CDs sold. 2. Be accessible. So i can download stuff no matter where i am. 3. Have a good framework which i can continue shopping. I'm sorry, Even with the popularity of internet, i'm still not getting these so i will continue pirate until the day when production companies figure out how to make shopping easy for me. | ||
|
thunk
United States6233 Posts
On October 04 2008 05:32 Excalibur_Z wrote: Because piracy directly affects sales numbers negatively (every copy pirated is a copy not sold) I agree, but I definitely think it's not 1:1. Not everyone who goes out and pirates a copy would buy it in real life. An interesting thought - Starcraft has some of the poorest copyright protection out there. But everyone says they've bought 2, 3 copies? For whatever reason, one can't pirate Starcraft. I think there's a lesson to be learned there by the gaming companies about piracy. | ||
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
| ||
|
Ludrik
Australia523 Posts
On October 04 2008 11:49 thunk wrote: An interesting thought - Starcraft has some of the poorest copyright protection out there. But everyone says they've bought 2, 3 copies? For whatever reason, one can't pirate Starcraft. I think there's a lesson to be learned there by the gaming companies about piracy. Have people seriously bought multiple copies of the same game? Talk about redundancy. IMO a users license to use a piece of software shouldn't be tied to the physical media (ie. the cd). If I accidently snap a game cd I don't see why I shouldn't be able to download an ISO and burn a new one. Also whoever said people don't pirate starcraft? Just because it is uncommon on a site like TL.net doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I know plenty of people who in recent times have pirated sc. | ||
|
SonuvBob
Aiur21549 Posts
On October 04 2008 11:49 thunk wrote: An interesting thought - Starcraft has some of the poorest copyright protection out there. But everyone says they've bought 2, 3 copies? For whatever reason, one can't pirate Starcraft. I think there's a lesson to be learned there by the gaming companies about piracy. SC requires a valid cdkey to play on bnet, which is basically 90% of the content of the game. The only better protection is in MMOs, which you can't play at all without access to official servers. It's not copyright protection since you can still copy the cd easily, but it makes copyright protection unnecessary, which is far better. Of course there's uonfficial servers for both SC and WoW, but they're essentially inferior due to smaller player bases and lack of support. PGT/ICCup/etc are an exception, but they probably don't cause a significant loss of sales since they only cater to a very small portion of the market, mostly folks who own the game anyway. Mainly (or purely) online gameplay and centralized servers aren't really an option for most games though. It's ideal for MMOs and good for RTS (where servers are essentially a matchmaking service) and online FPS (where WON/Steam/etc have to validate your cdkey) but games that are mainly single player are screwed. On October 04 2008 12:38 Ludrik wrote: Have people seriously bought multiple copies of the same game? Talk about redundancy. IMO a users license to use a piece of software shouldn't be tied to the physical media (ie. the cd). If I accidently snap a game cd I don't see why I shouldn't be able to download an ISO and burn a new one. Also whoever said people don't pirate starcraft? Just because it is uncommon on a site like TL.net doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I know plenty of people who in recent times have pirated sc. CDs break, get scratched, lost, etc. You can d/l the ISO from blizz now though, just need a valid cdkey. | ||
|
haduken
Australia8267 Posts
I had to search for 14 days in China trying to find a legal Starcraft then to discover that there is no cd key -_-. | ||
|
il0seonpurpose
Korea (South)5638 Posts
Edit: nvm, I guess dl is free for that documentary | ||
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
I really do. I understand that the basic concepts behind copyright and intellectual property and ownership are all changing. Musicians used to bitch about the phonograph. "Who will come to our concerts now?" they asked. Then they bitched about the cassette tape. Then the CD. And now, mp3s. Each time a new format has been developed, the industry managed to harness a new business model and grow. Somehow creative types will find a way to use the new technology to their benefit, to reach more people and sustain a good living doing so in the meantime. However, I think people are being a little too cavalier with their attitudes towards piracy. I work in the Korean film industry. Currently, only about 30% of filmmaking staff and crew are employed. This is because there are few movies in production. This is partially because it's not easy for a film to make money these days, so investors are reluctant to spend their money. This is partially because people are pirating. Where it really hurts most is the anciliaries (after-theater money makers). See, movie stuidios make more money off of the DVD releases and broadcasting rights to the movies than the initial theater release. Piracy really affects DVD rentals and sales, which takes a chunk out of possible income for any movie. I won't claim to know what it's like for the music or game industry, but when I look around and see friends and colleagues out of work, it does make me think about downloading another movie. I believe like most others that eventually the industry will have to find an answer and adapt or go extinct. That is the way the world will go. But I don't like it when people say they "have a right" to pirate, or that there is "nothing wrong" or "nothing harmful" with pirating. Because it's not true. The current business model must change, but in the meantime, PIRACY HARMS PEOPLE. It's difficult for me to fathom, becuase equal amounts of time, money, and human lives are spent making a movie as they are to make a car. More time and money and human lives were spent making that album than the chicken burrito + nachos and guacamole that you had for dinner. Yet people don't claim that it's ok to "just have" the Mexican food. People will drop 10 bucks for dinner but not 10 bucks for some culture? Ok, I would too, because money is precious. But don't try to justify it as anything else. Piracy is harmful and in a loose way, it is stealing. | ||
|
Purind
Canada3562 Posts
On October 04 2008 06:17 VIB wrote: Excalibur_Z, your post could be resumed to "copyright benefits me, I make money off it so does my colleagues. Piracy reduces our income, therefore pirating is a bad thing.". Yea it's bad, for you. Not for myself nor for 99% of the population. I don't really understand the point. Are you in support of dining and dashing because not paying for food that the restaurant had to spend labour and money making will help 99% of us that want to eat food, and hurt the 1% that make food for us? That's essentially what I see out of this argument I'm not gonna go into this, as I don't have the energy to argue over this issue, but if you can explain your point, that would be great | ||
|
SweeTLemonS[TPR]
11739 Posts
Your views on this are unbelievably simplistic and naive. You act as if companies don't exist to create a profit. Yes, buying the product makes some people richer, but it also creates incentive for other people to make somewhat similar products. And saying to Excal that he somehow proves your point is just idiotic. There are probably several hundred people that work for that company, and if the company ceases to profit, they'll lose their jobs. If it were JUST that one company then it probably wouldn't be that big of a deal, because it'd just be ONE company folding. But it's not just one company, it's ALL of them that are getting ripped off. On October 04 2008 08:53 KlaCkoN wrote: Firstly, like someone above mentioned it is not stealing by the letter of the law. Secondly, I described why I cannot think it is morally wrong. And then I expressed the rather pragmatic view that either the people making money of these things adapt to the fact that people can share freely or they loose their jobs. An industry cannot survive if the very foundation of it's existance is the fact that people are not allowed to share. edit: @ above I think it is slightly less here, my point was that blizzard made a lot of money on wc3, in an age where pirating already had started to become rampant, only because it was a good game. That is so stupid. The industry needs money to survive. If they don't get paid, they're going to stop making it. And then what the fuck are you going to do? Nothing, because nothing will be made anymore. If people don't get paid, they won't make shit; they won't work. On October 04 2008 11:56 Physician wrote: ..patenting, copyright etc.. are antiquated and counter productive concepts that are in dire need of revision, if not extinction. The very term "intellectual property" is an oxymoron. It is an artificial construction that today hinders the evolution of ideas and progress far more than any of its proposed benefits. No, that's just dumb. What it does is it provides protection for the creation of NEW ideas. We can't just take the same old ideas and keep recycling them and still progress. Maybe the length of the copyright/patent should be changed, maybe it needs to be changed, but it does not need to be thrown away. Take your own field, for instance. If there weren't patents, we would NEVER see new medicines. Why? Because not a single drug company actually exists to help people; they exist to make a profit. If just anyone could come along and steal their idea after they put the millions, sometimes billions, of dollars into research and development of their drug, then no one would research and develop anything anymore. They'd all be waiting for someone else to do it so they could take all their hard work and profit off of it without having to work for it. Patents and copyrights are absolutely vital to progression. | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
Pro piracy / Anti Intellectual Property (IP) arguments: - Freedom, this one should be obvious. - IP hurts creativity in many different ways. Forbids you to create from/further develop existing content. - Consequently from the above, IP degrade final product quality. - Consequently again IP hurts the final consumers!! Which is the ~99% of the population. - IP hurts the final consumers again, but also economically - it's expensive. - Hurts costumers one more time when it comes to support longevity. Your X broke, but the company who produces and has the copyright over X bankrupt. Now similar companies cannot provide you support because their X is different due to copyrights. - IP largely contributes to economical imbalance absurds, how much does Britney Spears make again? - Social imbalances which derivates from economical imbalance - IP is the main support of a whole industry branch that is irrelevant/has no place in modern technology: The record industry. (Read Brainx's post in this thread) - Bad for economy, IP admittedly equals monopoly which is an anti-competitive behavior and against free market - IP is doomed to extinction, the chairman of the MPAA!!! admits they're aware of this on the movie! (Watch it if you haven't) Might take 50 or 100 years, but it's inevitable no matter how much you disagree with it. Anti piracy / Pro intellectual property - Piracy hurts that very few amount of the population who: 1) directly benefits economically from copyrights and 2) failed to adapt unlike many others. - ....hmm, can't think of anything else :S So yes. Piracy does harms some few people, I give you that. But intellectual property harms many more people and much more dramatically. Look at the above and now you tell me. What is right? What is immoral? | ||
|
disciplines
United States6 Posts
| ||
|
gm.tOSS
Germany898 Posts
On October 04 2008 13:52 HonestTea wrote: I hear you. I really do. I understand that the basic concepts behind copyright and intellectual property and ownership are all changing. Musicians used to bitch about the phonograph. "Who will come to our concerts now?" they asked. Then they bitched about the cassette tape. Then the CD. And now, mp3s. Each time a new format has been developed, the industry managed to harness a new business model and grow. Somehow creative types will find a way to use the new technology to their benefit, to reach more people and sustain a good living doing so in the meantime. However, I think people are being a little too cavalier with their attitudes towards piracy. I work in the Korean film industry. Currently, only about 30% of filmmaking staff and crew are employed. This is because there are few movies in production. This is partially because it's not easy for a film to make money these days, so investors are reluctant to spend their money. This is partially because people are pirating. Where it really hurts most is the anciliaries (after-theater money makers). See, movie stuidios make more money off of the DVD releases and broadcasting rights to the movies than the initial theater release. Piracy really affects DVD rentals and sales, which takes a chunk out of possible income for any movie. I won't claim to know what it's like for the music or game industry, but when I look around and see friends and colleagues out of work, it does make me think about downloading another movie. I believe like most others that eventually the industry will have to find an answer and adapt or go extinct. That is the way the world will go. But I don't like it when people say they "have a right" to pirate, or that there is "nothing wrong" or "nothing harmful" with pirating. Because it's not true. The current business model must change, but in the meantime, PIRACY HARMS PEOPLE. It's difficult for me to fathom, becuase equal amounts of time, money, and human lives are spent making a movie as they are to make a car. More time and money and human lives were spent making that album than the chicken burrito + nachos and guacamole that you had for dinner. Yet people don't claim that it's ok to "just have" the Mexican food. People will drop 10 bucks for dinner but not 10 bucks for some culture? Ok, I would too, because money is precious. But don't try to justify it as anything else. Piracy is harmful and in a loose way, it is stealing. QFT | ||
|
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
 ? | ||
| ||
