Is the copyright industry shooting itself in the foot?

Locky said:
I would love a legitimate option to download movies and series as they come out, but sadly there is no option (I think)
Click to expand...

I'd pay good money - easily as much as a semi-decent sky subscription - to have the ability to download television (perhaps not even movies) in a form I could watch on whatever device I wanted, however I want. I spend a lot of time travelling and streaming doesn't work. I want to watch content when I'm travelling and I can't, because I can't put a DVD in a tablet and I can't stream Netflix with a variable mobile data connection.
 
Its a shame that the rise of streaming services means actual downloads will likely never happen.

I have both SkyGo and LoveFilm on my tablet. Great... The only times I can watch anything on it at a decent quality is... when I'm at home, where my TV is!
 
[DOD]Asprilla;23512834 said:
Which is weird because sales have risen and revenues have gone down.

What's the problem with iTunes, spotify, etc?
Click to expand...
Not talking about music here.

But this
[TW]Fox;23512895 said:
to have the ability to download television (perhaps not even movies) in a form I could watch on whatever device I wanted, however I want.
Click to expand...

is currently impossible without piracy for films + TV
 
Make a Steam equivalent for movies and they're away.

However, as some of the advantages that Steam brings to gaming wouldn't work for movies (auto updates, community features, save clouds etc.) they'd need to compensate with lower pricing.

If I was able to buy decent 720p/1080p downloads that I could then use on my PC, or media player on TV, or my phone or whatever else I please, for £5 to £8 then i'd buy plenty. Streaming is of absolutely no interest to me a) because my home connection isn't fast enough to stream high quality and b) I want to be watch 'offline'.

Given I currently have to pay nearly £20 for a new release in HiDef that is limited to only working on my TV with BluRay player unless I spend ages encoding myself, there is just no appeal to buy at all.

I think for many, film piracy doesn't necessarily appeal just because of the fact it's free but because a 720p/1080p rip is a much more flexible and hassle free format than a BluRay disc is.

For music, I find spotify works well most of the time.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately the Spotify model isn't great for the music industry; the artists get peanuts and the labels pretty much the same. The TV / Movie industry will fight that as much as they can.

The main reason the TV / Movie industry persists with the model it does is that it's still more profitable than the alternative. More people will pay for content that steal it; it's not like we couldn't get pirated material before the internet.
 
[TW]Fox;23512895 said:
I'd pay good money - easily as much as a semi-decent sky subscription - to have the ability to download television (perhaps not even movies) in a form I could watch on whatever device I wanted, however I want. I spend a lot of time travelling and streaming doesn't work. I want to watch content when I'm travelling and I can't, because I can't put a DVD in a tablet and I can't stream Netflix with a variable mobile data connection.
Click to expand...

I'm the same. I would absolutely love something like this!
 
Look at what happened to Megaupload. They were creating a service where musicians could sell their music online and retain the vast majority of the profits from sales, a much better deal than you'd get with any record company. They even had some famous names on board.


Next thing, the owner of Megaupload is arrested, servers seized, and it all goes down the pan. The record industry has the US government in it's back pocket, a huge amount of power.
 
I find it quite amazing that on one hand the message they give off is they want you to share all your personal data with them and sharing is good, it's great, you're a pariah if you don't want to share and have something to hide, you're probably a terrorist or a paedophile if you want to keep all your personal data to yourself and not give it away for free so Corporations can make money off you. But it's a completely different story when it's their commercial data involved, then they get a bit protective and will tell you how bad it is to even think about doing it, and even go to great lengths like lobbying World Govts. to make Laws new to stop it from happening. It's a funny old World. ;)
 
[TW]Fox;23513659 said:
You probably are, yes. Everyone else knows what he means despite the poor choice of words. I suspect you know, too.
Click to expand...

Arguably, there is a "copyright industry" anyway considering how much they're putting in to it.
 
[DOD]Asprilla;23513161 said:
Unfortunately the Spotify model isn't great for the music industry; the artists get peanuts and the labels pretty much the same. The TV / Movie industry will fight that as much as they can.

The main reason the TV / Movie industry persists with the model it does is that it's still more profitable than the alternative. More people will pay for content that steal it; it's not like we couldn't get pirated material before the internet.
Click to expand...

The artists get peanuts through traditional means anyway.
Artists get most money from touring.
 
[DOD]Asprilla;23513161 said:
Unfortunately the Spotify model isn't great for the music industry; the artists get peanuts and the labels pretty much the same. The TV / Movie industry will fight that as much as they can.

The main reason the TV / Movie industry persists with the model it does is that it's still more profitable than the alternative. More people will pay for content that steal it; it's not like we couldn't get pirated material before the internet.
Click to expand...

It seems that most people who say that copyright infringement is stealing don't understand the subject they're trying to discuss.

As has been said, the artists get very little regardless (look to the post about Megaupload and what they were planning to do).

There is no argument as for why the labels should get more money, they simply don't deserve it.

Artists should get more money, yeah, piracy isn't really something that affects the artists, it affects the labels.
 
I get all my pc games from NO PIRACY MENTIONING PLEASE! Nothing wrong with it in my view. If people want to share their stuff then that's their prerogative.
 
Moses said:
There's simply no argument for why people should be entitled to the work of another, gratis. A lack of options doesn't make copyright infringement okay.
Click to expand...

Could you point me to where I said that? Because I'm struggling to find it, which is very odd since it's my post.
 
Moses said:
You didn't say that, it was merely mirroring how you were saying there's no justification for the labels getting more money/they don't deserve it. I was just saying people don't deserve to have stuff for free, so, out of the two, the labels are in the more objectively justifiable position (as they're not impinging on the rights of another).
Click to expand...

My point was that I was responding to someone who seemed to think that piracy damages the artists, when it actually damages the record labels who are also damaging the artists anyway.

Record labels are a relic of past times really, they don't really "need" to be part of the industry any more as it's evolved well past the point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom