Is piracy dying?

But that's exactly why the current situation is retarded. As a hypothetical example, if I illegally download a copy of a show which has been aired in the US and will be added to UK Netflix in a weeks time, has anyone really lost out? I've already paid my Netflix sub, Netflix has paid the content creator. No one has lost out financially.

Where is the harm?

The harm is that it encourages the content creator to make more because they know people will download it. This I guess has a much larger impact over different content.
 
But that's exactly why the current situation is retarded. As a hypothetical example, if I illegally download a copy of a show which has been aired in the US and will be added to UK Netflix in a weeks time, has anyone really lost out? I've already paid my Netflix sub, Netflix has paid the content creator. No one has lost out financially.

Where is the harm?
Well it does harm as streaming services pay per view so by you watching a tv show from torrent or w/e and not watching on netflix while netflix still made money the tv company didn't.
 
Why does that matter?

Why wouldn't it matter? You'd be watching content which hasn't been legally paid for, so it would be like downloading illegally.

So if people didn't go down this road, they would purchase the films or rent the films to watch, meaning money doesn't get lost.
 
Have you seen the price of Porn!!!
I know it's a stiff industry but it's way too expensive! no wonder people take matters into their own hands and acquire it by other means.
 
I downloaded loads back in the day. But with Spotify and buying albums for around 79p, I have no need for illegally downloading music now. TV shows and movies are a different matter, but I have a 'friend' on plex that let's me pay him a small price for access to his...around 52tb worth of media, plus iptv. Combined with Netflix and Amazon prime, I have no need to download anything illegal now.
 
Can't stand people who try to justify piracy. The ones in the PC section who call it "try before you buy"... :rolleyes:

It has been known to get people into TV programs. They watch the first two or three and then get themselves the series on DVD/Blu-ray/Legit Downloads.

Have you seen the price of Porn!!!
I know it's a stiff industry

You don't say! :D
 
The pirate genie has been let out of the bottle, there is no hope in putting it back in, people will never pay for what they can get for free.
 
I have pirated very little in the last few years. Since Netflix has become available, I don't find myself wanting to download films or programmes very often. Since you can go on site that sell game keys for about 10% of what Steam does, and they actually keep the games up to date (unlike torrents), I only buy game keys now and don't pirate games.

Music is a different matter. Music is still consistently overpriced, and I have absolutely no qualms about downloading that stuff, particularly when it's something like The Beatles, who have made enough money 10 times over to allow me to download their discography.

No regrets, anyway!
 
Why wouldn't it matter? You'd be watching content which hasn't been legally paid for, so it would be like downloading illegally.

So if people didn't go down this road, they would purchase the films or rent the films to watch, meaning money doesn't get lost.
Except that it actually has been paid for...

You also can't lose something you never had.
 
Can't stand people who try to justify piracy. The ones in the PC section who call it "try before you buy"... :rolleyes:

Why does anyone have to justify it? What exactly is wrong with people using it as a means to essentially demo the game?

If it's good, they buy if it's crap they don't.
 
Yes of course it's dying. Everyone has netflix and spotify now. It costs the same as a vpn, vip account, seedbox. I haven't used torrents in a few years since I got netflix, amazon prime, etc. The apps are right on my smart TV. I have even bought some shows from amazon which I would never have dreamed of doing years ago. It's $15 or whatever and 2 clicks on the remote. The cost of a chipotle and a coke. My home media server hasnt been turned on in ages. I could get gig fiber from my ISP but dont even care anymore. 10 years ago I would be giddy about that.

Games... they are go through steam or whatever now (I dont play games). Apps... adobe for example has software as a service now. Harder and harder to crack stuff.

The only traffic now is from 3rd world places where you cant easily get netflix.

I was a 0sec courier in the 90s and early 00s with leech on several topsites, even had a few releases, site admin on a few FTPs. Leech access to pres from the top groups on 10gig sites. I seen it all. FTP, FXP, DCC bots, usenet, torrents, file lockers. Now anybody can get pres within a couple mins from a torrent site by paying for vip, but the releases are worthless. I'll just wait a year until it goes on netflix, or pay amazon.
 
They claim that if it's good they buy it and if it's crap they don't. That doesn't make it true.

And if it is true, which for some it will be of course, why does that justify infringing another's property rights? If they are missing out on sales through their choice of distribution, that's up to them. You cool with me using your e cig product labels on stuff I start selling?

How is that remotely the same thing? Firstly, you'd ask me to do a design, I'd do it then you'd pay me and I'd send you the finished design.

How is testing for personal use the same as essentially selling it for profit exactly?
 
But that's exactly why the current situation is retarded. As a hypothetical example, if I illegally download a copy of a show which has been aired in the US and will be added to UK Netflix in a weeks time, has anyone really lost out? I've already paid my Netflix sub, Netflix has paid the content creator. No one has lost out financially.

Where is the harm?

There is no harm. Nothing wrong with that approach at all. Firms need to understand that the consumer wants media in the format and at the time of their choosing, and until they change their attitudes then people will continue to download.

From the perspective of the media creators, the reality is far better for them now than it was, but they are still far too slow to move with the times. They should be at the forefront of technology for content delivery, but instead they are years behind.

They have no-one to blame but themselves.
 
They claim that if it's good they buy it and if it's crap they don't. That doesn't make it true.

There's another option; I suspect that a large quantity of downloads occur because of availability.

So for example, Film X is released at the movies. I look at it and the reviews and conclude it's average at best. I am not going to spend £20+ going to watch it. Several months later I am browsing my favourite download source and I see a decent copy, so I get it.

There is no material revenue loss to the studio, because I would never have paid to watch it in the first place.
 
I'd just have the same product and stick the label on. Good work avoiding the rest of the post ;).

So? If they don't well they don't, but for the sake of the argument we're talking about the ones that do. I'm not avoiding anything, you're not really giving good or accurate examples.

Why are you still talking about the sale of products? Downloading something for personal use isn't the same as selling it for profit.
 
Back
Top Bottom