No more btjunkie :-(

[Nexus]

media must be one of the only things you pay for, that you never own.

and whats with the 'Release movie to cinema' then 'release to DVD' then release to 'netflix/sky' ?

people have been ripped off too long, and those unable to make it to a cinema, have waited too long from it to come to DVD.

ok to complain but heres my model.

i pay for a movie, say £20. that £20 gives me the right to watch it, at the cinema/home on the same release date, i am also given a code to redeem at HMV for my DVD/Digital copy. to keep for future viewing.

with this, people on the move, disabled/unable to go to cinema and on a mix of media players can watch this 'movie'

and if you really want to? go to the cinema.

personaly i find the cinema a waste of money now, always some annoying kid there chatting or on a mobile 'facebookin' or some other distraction, coupled with a **** movie like Mission Impossible Ghost Proticol or Ghost Rider 2. its all just too much

I see a lot of people on here saying similar to this, demanding that the reason they pirate is because they can't watch films in the cinema at home now, or because the latest US tv show isn't available in the UK yet.

You clearly have no understanding of how the industry works if you think this demand is reasonable.

If you make films available across all mediums, in all territories, with or without one set fee for access anywhere, you effectively kill a large number of businesses, many people are out of jobs and more critically the Studio looses huge chunks of their revenue stream.

Now while the likely response here will be something about Studios having enough money, so it doesn't matter if you pirate, you need to understand that all these revenue streams are required to make, sell and market a film, it's how it has operated for years. While some films are so huge they can manage simultaneous worldwide release, the majority aren't. They need cinema box office takings before it can be released in other territories, so that they have the budget to market and distribute there. They still need money to market the Home video release, plus to be able to sell the rights to rental services it will be based on the Box Office performance of the film.

I personally would add that the wait for home video release after the cinema now is tiny compared to what it was in the past.

Similarly with tv shows, they are created by or sold to television networks who show them based on advertising revenue which I'm sure most people must be aware of. If a show is created in the US and it's successful, they can sell it to other territories around the world which is a huge revenue stream. Despite online streaming, the majority of the world still watch regular tv, that won't change for the foreseeable future. If say Netflix was given a TV show to air worldwide simultaneously, the user base is tiny in comparison and advertisers wouldn't get the same return as on a television channel. Thus that model is nowhere near ready yet and means less revenue so less shows get made.

 

[Matteysan]

I love torrents, it keeps the powers that be off the backs of news groups

Newsgroups are next

Why does everyone think newsgroups are a safe haven & more importantly why are people on their high horses when they are paying to pirate?

 

[The Halk]

I see a lot of people on here saying similar to this, demanding that the reason they pirate is because they can't watch films in the cinema at home now, or because the latest US tv show isn't available in the UK yet.

You clearly have no understanding of how the industry works if you think this demand is reasonable.

If you make films available across all mediums, in all territories, with or without one set fee for access anywhere, you effectively kill a large number of businesses, many people are out of jobs and more critically the Studio looses huge chunks of their revenue stream.

I don't agree with the point you're responding to, but I don't agree with you either.

First of all I don't give a snot about the jobs you mention. Most of them are middle men type reseller jobs and we should never be concerned about doing things badly just to keep jobs. Things evolve, industries slide away and new industries appear, let's not retard the development of technology just to save jobs.

As for the demands though they are not reasonable. The rights holders can do anything they like the rights and we don't have the right to refuse to play and just consume the content anyway.

However copyright laws are totally wrong. Any intellectual product is not just the product of the direct creator, it was created by society itself. I don't mind rights ownership for a short time, but really it can GTF after a few years. That's still plenty of time for a film to go through cinema, PPV, Bluray, TV sales. It's still plenty of time for an album to do it's own cycle. The idea that things are created in a vacuum and thus owned forever by their creators is wrong.

 

[Nexus]

While there are some Middlemen involved, I was more referring to the fact that if you release something simultaneously, you can effectively kill the entire cinema industry. While you might not give a 'snot', a lot of people do and as I said before you need the box office before you can even begin to entertain other releases.

If you created something protected by copyright law, would you really be happy if in 5 years time you could no longer make any money from it and people were allowed to do whatever they liked with it? Thought not...

 

[KIA]

Newsgroups are next

Why does everyone think newsgroups are a safe haven & more importantly why are people on their high horses when they are paying to pirate?

Nobody cares about newsgroups. There's nothing to protect because it's at the bottom of the list in terms of popularity.

 

[Kobrakai]

I did quite a bit of research into this as part of my degree several years ago and came to the conclusion that piracy helps artists to gain recognition, which is why a number of artists have publicly voiced their support for piracy in the past.

i.e.

1. Person illegally downloads music they have not heard of or would not otherwise buy.
2. Person enjoys music and tells their friends.
3. Friend buys music based on recommendation.
4. ???
5. Profit.

The artists that suffer are the ones selling millions of records every year that can definitely afford the loss. Why should these people get paid more than doctors, scientists and engineers? It's just greed.

 

[Kobrakai]

If you're not with an ISP that throttles bittorrent (BT and Virgin Media are the worst for this), and you use private bittorrent sites where half the torrents are seeded by dedicated servers, then you will max your connection with every download. I normally download at 10MB/sec from torrents.

 

[Nexus]

I did quite a bit of research into this as part of my degree several years ago and came to the conclusion that piracy helps artists to gain recognition, which is why a number of artists have publicly voiced their support for piracy in the past.

i.e.

1. Person illegally downloads music they have not heard of or would not otherwise buy.
2. Person enjoys music and tells their friends.
3. Friend buys music based on recommendation.
4. ???
5. Profit.

You keep saying this, but you can't really just quantify it like that....

- The indicated person may just give the music to their friends.

- The friends may just downloaded illegally.

- If Artists say piracy is alright and everybody does so, then who is going to buy it at all? Thus if that becomes the culture that people grow up with now, then the less record labels there are, and the less that money will be invested in anything that is a risk. In a sense, you will end up with more X-Factor style artists who are a safe bet than anything else.

- Not every Artist or Label is some huge corporation that can take piracy losses, it has an effect on the small players.

The artists that suffer are the ones selling millions of records every year that can definitely afford the loss. Why should these people get paid more than doctors, scientists and engineers? It's just greed.

Jealous much?

There are plenty of people in well paid jobs who don't have to do much, I'd argue that Artists who perform and create music are putting in more effort than some.

 

[Scougar]

Netflix has got the right idea. Why pirate stuff when Netflix is cheap, easy and legal?

Because the content that netflix has is very limited (I've had it in the USA and it's just as limited there).

 

[Soundood]

I see a lot of people on here saying similar to this, demanding that the reason they pirate is because they can't watch films in the cinema at home now, or because the latest US tv show isn't available in the UK yet.

You clearly have no understanding of how the industry works if you think this demand is reasonable.

If you make films available across all mediums, in all territories, with or without one set fee for access anywhere, you effectively kill a large number of businesses, many people are out of jobs and more critically the Studio looses huge chunks of their revenue stream.

Now while the likely response here will be something about Studios having enough money, so it doesn't matter if you pirate, you need to understand that all these revenue streams are required to make, sell and market a film, it's how it has operated for years. While some films are so huge they can manage simultaneous worldwide release, the majority aren't. They need cinema box office takings before it can be released in other territories, so that they have the budget to market and distribute there. They still need money to market the Home video release, plus to be able to sell the rights to rental services it will be based on the Box Office performance of the film.

I personally would add that the wait for home video release after the cinema now is tiny compared to what it was in the past.

Similarly with tv shows, they are created by or sold to television networks who show them based on advertising revenue which I'm sure most people must be aware of. If a show is created in the US and it's successful, they can sell it to other territories around the world which is a huge revenue stream. Despite online streaming, the majority of the world still watch regular tv, that won't change for the foreseeable future. If say Netflix was given a TV show to air worldwide simultaneously, the user base is tiny in comparison and advertisers wouldn't get the same return as on a television channel. Thus that model is nowhere near ready yet and means less revenue so less shows get made.

as it goes i know quite a lot about it, i am a sound engineer who worked in TV/movie production for years, also touring live rock'n'roll.

this model i suggested is nothing new, and is basicaly been adopted by the music industry for years, hence why itunes is so big. this model is at the core of itunes ethos. music for everyone, anywhere, to pretty much any device, at the same time.

as for advertisers, they have known for years that TV is dead as a medium, were have programmed ourselves to switch off during adverts. the way forward, and currently being used, is targeting via social networks, google ads, etc.

with all due respect, i feel its opinions like yours that are holding us back, from moving forward, cant you see the change? blu-ray releases with a SD version on DVD and also a digital copy to transfer to your PC/iphone/mac?

all that is left to do is to have the worldwide all format release, to break the ice, and were rolling.

 

[VeNT]

While there are some Middlemen involved, I was more referring to the fact that if you release something simultaneously, you can effectively kill the entire cinema industry. While you might not give a 'snot', a lot of people do and as I said before you need the box office before you can even begin to entertain other releases.

I'm not entirely sure how releasing something in the UK/Europe at the same time as the US would "kill the entire cinema industry".
Maybe once when they could only afford to create x number of reels of tape but it's mostly digital now so makes 0 difference if it's shown in 10 cinemas or 10,000.

What you are basically saying is that the cinema industry is based around treating everyone outside the US as second class citizens?

If you created something protected by copyright law, would you really be happy if in 5 years time you could no longer make any money from it and people were allowed to do whatever they liked with it? Thought not...

Maybe not, but would I feel the same in 75 years? or 10 years after I'd died? or 100 years after I died?

Right now we are lining the pockets of people who had -0 involvement in the process of producing the content but because they never go out of copyright they still get paid!

madness!

 

[Nexus]

as it goes i know quite a lot about it, i am a sound engineer who worked in TV/movie production for years, also touring live rock'n'roll.

this model i suggested is nothing new, and is basicaly been adopted by the music industry for years, hence why itunes is so big. this model is at the core of itunes ethos. music for everyone, anywhere, to pretty much any device, at the same time.

I was only talking about TV and Film in my previous post.
The music industry is different and the iTunes model of having your music available to you anywhere on any device is fine and is working, I've not disputed that. Music though is different, once it's out there it can be available to buy on whatever medium it's for sale on simultaneously. As I said in my previous post, Films and TV rely on box office revenue and advertising before they can be distributed and marketed elsewhere.

as for advertisers, they have known for years that TV is dead as a medium, were have programmed ourselves to switch off during adverts. the way forward, and currently being used, is targeting via social networks, google ads, etc.

Sorry you are totally wrong.
While I agree that online advertising has ramped up massively, it's not replaced other forms of advertising, television is still the main medium for advertising and delivers the most effective campaign results, even if you perhaps don't watch television yourself.

with all due respect, i feel its opinions like yours that are holding us back, from moving forward, cant you see the change? blu-ray releases with a SD version on DVD and also a digital copy to transfer to your PC/iphone/mac?

all that is left to do is to have the worldwide all format release, to break the ice, and were rolling.

It's not my opinion, I simply stated that it's how the industry works.

Put aside your big budget hollywood blockbusters for a minute and think of some of the smaller budget films, which there are plenty of. They might begin with showings in a number of Cinemas in the US, once they've got some box office revenue, then they can ramp up their marketing and increase the number showing the film. They can then afford to distribute and advertise in other countries. Even many big budget films do this, that's why you have a Premiere in each country and stars on all the talk shows, because advertising is just as important as the film itself is.

If you release a film on all formats simultaneously, then the number of people who go and see it at the cinema will take a massive dive, thus jeopardising it's future. Not to mention of it's also available online to stream or buy straight away, then it further sends brick and mortar stores down the pan.

Further to that, as I've said already, money is also key. A Film or Television show gets so much of it's revenue from selling to other countries, to television stations, to rental services etc.

If as somebody suggested in a past thread, somebody like HBO were to show something like Game Of Thrones for free worldwide on their website, but with adverts, then that would not make anything like the money they do from selling the show to every other tv network who will buy it.

 

[Nexus]

I'm not entirely sure how releasing something in the UK/Europe at the same time as the US would "kill the entire cinema industry".
Maybe once when they could only afford to create x number of reels of tape but it's mostly digital now so makes 0 difference if it's shown in 10 cinemas or 10,000.

What you are basically saying is that the cinema industry is based around treating everyone outside the US as second class citizens?

If a new film comes out and it's showing in the Cinema, but at the sametime it's straight away available in HMV, on Sky, on LoveFilm/Netflix.... are you honestly telling me that's not going to massively effect cinema box office takings... which as I've said numerous times now is how you can afford to market and bring a film to other formats.

It's not about treating anyone like second class citizens, the US just happens to be where most films and television shows are created and launched.

In the case of television shows, it has to be successful in the US before they can sell it to other regions. Likewise here in our own country, do you really think BBC Worldwide or ITV are going to be able to sell something to US networks if it's not been popular over here first?

On the film front, we got The Avengers before the US did... so second class citizens eh?

Maybe not, but would I feel the same in 75 years? or 10 years after I'd died? or 100 years after I died?

Right now we are lining the pockets of people who had -0 involvement in the process of producing the content but because they never go out of copyright they still get paid!

madness!

But that money could go to your family... or whoever owns the copyright, as it could have course be bought and traded.

 

[cm1179]

my provider (orange) now blocks TPB.

 

[estebanrey]

What annoys me is when people compare downloading a DVD to stealing one from a shop.

That's like saying taking a photo of someone is the same as kidnapping them.

 

[iviv]

- If Artists say piracy is alright and everybody does so, then who is going to buy it at all? Thus if that becomes the culture that people grow up with now, then the less record labels there are, and the less that money will be invested in anything that is a risk. In a sense, you will end up with more X-Factor style artists who are a safe bet than anything else.

- Not every Artist or Label is some huge corporation that can take piracy losses, it has an effect on the small players.

Have you heard of The Promo Bay? TPB are featuring indie artists who don't have labels, they get displayed as the banner on the site, which is a link to their torrent. What does this gain them? Well, TPB gets a few million hits each day, all of them will see the banner. But why would people want to give their work away? Surely its destroying the business?

Also, even large bands use torrents to promote their own work. Others do too.

The industry is clinging to a defunct business model which clearly doesn't function in the digital age.

 

[the shadow]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ttacked-mystery-hacker.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

 

[robgmun]

What annoys me is when people compare downloading a DVD to stealing one from a shop.

That's like saying taking a photo of someone is the same as kidnapping them.

LOL! I'll remember that one!

 

[robgmun]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ttacked-mystery-hacker.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Talk about slow It's already been back for a day! It's always going off line now and then for a day or so. TPB is not going anywhere!

 

[fendi]

What annoys me is when people compare downloading a DVD to stealing one from a shop.

That's like saying taking a photo of someone is the same as kidnapping them.

You will see a reply saying that just because you would not buy a DVD does not give you the right to watch it.