Magic has nothing to do with it, unless you think the ability to infinitely reproduce a digital file is magic. And I made no claim to entitlement either, I just stated a simple economic reality. I know those freak you out.
Lines 1-4: No, nobody here thinks any of those things.
Line 5: Pretty sure most people here do that. No evidence to the contrary.
Line 6: Correct on all points, but none of them have anything to do with this story. How about you comment on the topic instead? Try answering these questions honestly:
Do you think this extended delay will increase or decrease sales?
Do you think this extended delay will increase or decrease customer goodwill?
Do you think this extended delay will increase or decrease piracy?
"Since money is fungible, every time I don't spend money on something that I pirate, it frees up money for something else."
Most of us have a limited amount of disposable income, and sometimes we can't justify spending that money on entertainment because (and this may be news to some in the biz) it's a relatively low priority compared to other expenses. If someone pirates something, chances are they were never going to pay, so no money has been freed up or spent elsewhere.
"The number tossed around here is 20 years. On that basis, Vna Halen will be touring playing public domain music. Don't you think that a little odd, and a little off?"
Only because you're not used to it, but that doesn't mean it's not a completely sensible idea that would substantially correct the imbalance in the copyright system. You know, the one that's supposed to provide a net benefit to the public, not copyright holders.
"No, it is a reflection only on the number of people who have a video camera in their hands and feel the urge to expose their personal lives to the rest of the world. Most people aren't sitting down and actively "creating content", they are just recording stuff and putting it online, with no particular creativity."
Ah, the "Cat Video" argument, where if it's not professionally produced by a movie or TV studio it's just crap that can't possibly compete. BS!
I quite often watch high-quality, pro and semi-pro content on YouTube, often short (5-20 min) video clips on topics I'm interested in, watching one after the other from the suggestions column. I can get great pleasure out of doing this, just as much as I would watching a TV show or movie, and hence can spend and hour or two not watching studio content, and not financially contributing to legacy companies as a result.
If you don't see that as competition to the studios, you're a fool. If you work for one of those legacy companies, you're a fool who might not have a job soon...
Publicly, they do. Loudly, consistently, and to anyone who'll listen (or they pay to listen). I have never heard anyone from the record companies credit their income losses to album unbundling, the rise of competing entertainment forms, or the GFC. They never say "Piracy is part of the problem", they only ever present it as an industry-killing bogeyman.
"My point was that the people who have a huge problem with blocking when it's IP-related typically don't have a problem with it when it's viruses or child porn."
Wow! You've finally figured out that most people consider child porn and computer viruses a far more serious problem than IP infringement. Well done catching up with the rest of us.
"My question is posed to understand why law tolerates on and not the other, not only with respect to DNS, but also with respect to the First Amendment and Due Process."
If you're trying to sound like a stereotypical morally-bankrupt lawyer, you're doing a great job.
The law is supposed to be a reflection of society's will, so if law tolerates one and not the other, it's because society tolerates one and not the other.
That you even have to ask why both society and the law views copyright infringement and child porn differently says a lot about you as a person.
Cost definitely doesn't equate to quality. Looking at IMDB's Top 250 list, you have to go down to #9 before you get to a movie that cost more than $100M. The eight movies above it only cost $80M combined.
"Why are you turning a story about an indie film into an Anti-Hollywood rant?"
Since you missed point entirely, Hollywood says you need 9-figure sums to make movies, the indies prove them wrong.
"Are you so twisted and jaded that you can't leave "the industry" alone for even a single post?"
You sound like you need to go make a "Leave Hollywood Alone!" YouTube video. Remember to wear plenty of mascara...
"Oh I forgot that's what this site is all about now, it isn't about technology, it's about slamming the MPAA and the RIAA - my bad."
You mean the MPAA and RIAA who represent the companies that've been aggressively fighting against every new form of content-delivery technology for a century?
Wait, are you seriously claiming that the RIAA and MPAA polls their members by inviting every single one of them to participate in an online poll and discussion, and gives the public open access to these discussion the whole time? How were we not aware of this?!
Way to show your lack of understanding by confusing two completely different issues.
SOPA won't stop piracy, people will quickly figure out ways around it, but the damages caused (disappearing websites, chilling effects on innovation, compromised internet security, etc) can't be circumvented by anyone.
"...isn't there something to be said about the fact that stealing or pirating is a problem, regardless of the degree?"
Stealing (depriving someone of physical goods) and piracy (presumably copyright infringement, not acts of robbery or criminal violence at sea) are quite different things. Don't mistakenly conflate the two.
"...don't try to tell me that downloading a movie rather then paying to see/own it is perfectly exceptable behaviour."
You mistakenly believe that those are the only two options. The third is I don't watch the movie at all because I don't believe it's worth the asking price. I might borrow it off someone, or wait for it to play on TV, etc. So if I was never going to pay for it, but I watch a downloaded copy, who is the victim? I might enjoy it so much I pay to see it again on a big screen, or buy the DVD, or recommend it to others who do pay. I might be so impressed with the creator's work I pay to see their next film. I have done all of these things. Of course if I don't enjoy the movie, all of the opposites may happen...
If you can only see infringement as an immoral act and a lost sale, you're views are far more simplistic than reality.
Can you point out exactly where anybody said anything in support of their mansions and megarich behaviour? I don't recall anybody other than you commenting on how their money was spent.
"It disgusts me when people in the wrong try to take the moral highground."
You mean like accusing people of "stealing" your product and making artists suffer, while at the same time using every accounting trick in the book to avoid paying royalties to artists on successful movies? That kind of moral high ground?
I don't disagree with you, but given the long history of abuse of the DMCA and other laws, do you honesty think SOPA wouldn't be used by someone with the "specific intent to silence a certain argument or perspective." These bills would make that far easier to do than it's ever been, and such censorship should never be easy.
On the post: Warner Bros. Just Keeps Pushing People To Piracy; New Deal Also Delays Queuing
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Warner Bros. Just Keeps Pushing People To Piracy; New Deal Also Delays Queuing
Re: Listen to the thieves ...
Line 5: Pretty sure most people here do that. No evidence to the contrary.
Line 6: Correct on all points, but none of them have anything to do with this story. How about you comment on the topic instead? Try answering these questions honestly:
Do you think this extended delay will increase or decrease sales?
Do you think this extended delay will increase or decrease customer goodwill?
Do you think this extended delay will increase or decrease piracy?
(Hint: D, D, I)
On the post: Warner Bros. Just Keeps Pushing People To Piracy; New Deal Also Delays Queuing
Re: Re: Re:
Most of us have a limited amount of disposable income, and sometimes we can't justify spending that money on entertainment because (and this may be news to some in the biz) it's a relatively low priority compared to other expenses. If someone pirates something, chances are they were never going to pay, so no money has been freed up or spent elsewhere.
On the post: Entertainment Industy Back To Demanding That Search Engines Censor The Web... Through 'Voluntary' Measures
Re: Re:
On the post: The Sky Is Rising: The Entertainment Industry Is Large & Growing... Not Shrinking
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Only because you're not used to it, but that doesn't mean it's not a completely sensible idea that would substantially correct the imbalance in the copyright system. You know, the one that's supposed to provide a net benefit to the public, not copyright holders.
On the post: The Sky Is Rising: The Entertainment Industry Is Large & Growing... Not Shrinking
Re: Re: Re:
Ah, the "Cat Video" argument, where if it's not professionally produced by a movie or TV studio it's just crap that can't possibly compete. BS!
I quite often watch high-quality, pro and semi-pro content on YouTube, often short (5-20 min) video clips on topics I'm interested in, watching one after the other from the suggestions column. I can get great pleasure out of doing this, just as much as I would watching a TV show or movie, and hence can spend and hour or two not watching studio content, and not financially contributing to legacy companies as a result.
If you don't see that as competition to the studios, you're a fool. If you work for one of those legacy companies, you're a fool who might not have a job soon...
On the post: The Sky Is Rising: The Entertainment Industry Is Large & Growing... Not Shrinking
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Publicly, they do. Loudly, consistently, and to anyone who'll listen (or they pay to listen). I have never heard anyone from the record companies credit their income losses to album unbundling, the rise of competing entertainment forms, or the GFC. They never say "Piracy is part of the problem", they only ever present it as an industry-killing bogeyman.
On the post: Misguided Twitter Protests... And Why Twitter Could Have Explained Itself Better
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Wow! You've finally figured out that most people consider child porn and computer viruses a far more serious problem than IP infringement. Well done catching up with the rest of us.
On the post: Senator Ron Wyden's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re: Re: Re:
If you're trying to sound like a stereotypical morally-bankrupt lawyer, you're doing a great job.
The law is supposed to be a reflection of society's will, so if law tolerates one and not the other, it's because society tolerates one and not the other.
That you even have to ask why both society and the law views copyright infringement and child porn differently says a lot about you as a person.
On the post: Once Again, If You're Trying To Save The $200 Million Movie, Perhaps You're Asking The Wrong Questions
Re: Re:
On the post: Once Again, If You're Trying To Save The $200 Million Movie, Perhaps You're Asking The Wrong Questions
Re:
Since you missed point entirely, Hollywood says you need 9-figure sums to make movies, the indies prove them wrong.
"Are you so twisted and jaded that you can't leave "the industry" alone for even a single post?"
You sound like you need to go make a "Leave Hollywood Alone!" YouTube video. Remember to wear plenty of mascara...
"Oh I forgot that's what this site is all about now, it isn't about technology, it's about slamming the MPAA and the RIAA - my bad."
You mean the MPAA and RIAA who represent the companies that've been aggressively fighting against every new form of content-delivery technology for a century?
On the post: Jimmy Wales Says Chris Dodd Should Be Fired
Re: Re: Re: Democracy?
On the post: Elected Officials Asked To Return Hollywood Money Following Dodd's Threats
Re:
They could use it to pay the artists.
Nah, just kidding! :)
On the post: EMI VP Comes Out Against SOPA/PIPA; Says The Answer To Piracy Is Providing A Better Service
Re:
SOPA won't stop piracy, people will quickly figure out ways around it, but the damages caused (disappearing websites, chilling effects on innovation, compromised internet security, etc) can't be circumvented by anyone.
On the post: Hollywood Unions: Now That You Lying Hacking Thieves Have Won, Can We Set A New Conciliatory Tone?
Re:
Both are censorship. However...
Society has generally come to a consensus that censoring child porn is acceptable.
Society has generally come to a consensus that censoring the King James Bible is not acceptable.
On the post: Hollywood Unions: Now That You Lying Hacking Thieves Have Won, Can We Set A New Conciliatory Tone?
Re: Seriously?
Stealing (depriving someone of physical goods) and piracy (presumably copyright infringement, not acts of robbery or criminal violence at sea) are quite different things. Don't mistakenly conflate the two.
"...don't try to tell me that downloading a movie rather then paying to see/own it is perfectly exceptable behaviour."
You mistakenly believe that those are the only two options. The third is I don't watch the movie at all because I don't believe it's worth the asking price. I might borrow it off someone, or wait for it to play on TV, etc. So if I was never going to pay for it, but I watch a downloaded copy, who is the victim? I might enjoy it so much I pay to see it again on a big screen, or buy the DVD, or recommend it to others who do pay. I might be so impressed with the creator's work I pay to see their next film. I have done all of these things. Of course if I don't enjoy the movie, all of the opposites may happen...
If you can only see infringement as an immoral act and a lost sale, you're views are far more simplistic than reality.
On the post: Megaupload Shutdown Means Other Companies Turning Off Useful Services
Re: Re: Re: Re: It's actually really, really bad
On the post: The Pirate Bay Press Release On SOPA: We Are The New Hollywood
Re: Except...
You mean like accusing people of "stealing" your product and making artists suffer, while at the same time using every accounting trick in the book to avoid paying royalties to artists on successful movies? That kind of moral high ground?
On the post: MPAA Directly & Publicly Threatens Politicians Who Aren't Corrupt Enough To Stay Bought
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Disgusting
On the post: Clay Shirky: Why SOPA's Not Going Away
Re: Re: Re: What a moron.
Next >>