PDA

View Full Version : Should we be worried?



nofam
04-12-2009, 04:23 PM
Scaremongering, or something far worse? (http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/0CE276FC1DFDD2A8CC2576810070E7C4)

:waughh:

gary67
04-12-2009, 04:47 PM
Yes we should if that article is true

KarameaDave
04-12-2009, 05:18 PM
OOOH Nasty!!:(

xyz823
04-12-2009, 05:28 PM
LOL everyone would be on small caps lol. No need for bigtime anymore haha. Because to be honest, all the people I know on big time are on it purely for *that* reason.

ubergeek85
04-12-2009, 06:32 PM
Nothing new to me.

If you read torrentfreak, you see how fat the fatcats really are.

Take a guess how much lady gaga got from 1m+ plays on some official streaming site? hint, it's under $200. Nope, that's not a typo.

Not that I particularly care for her or her music, but think about it...

wainuitech
04-12-2009, 08:13 PM
LOL everyone would be on small caps lol. No need for bigtime anymore haha. Because to be honest, all the people I know on big time are on it purely for *that* reason. So the people you know that are on Big time all pirates eh!!

I can name many people that have big download totals per month, and every thing is completely legit.

My own downloading - I easily can bring through 40 -60 GB per month - and not one illegal download in there anywhere.

xyz823
04-12-2009, 08:20 PM
So the people you know that are on Big time all pirates eh!!

I can name many people that have big download totals per month, and every thing is completely legit.

My own downloading - I easily can bring through 40 -60 GB per month - and not one illegal download in there anywhere.

Yup I know not everyone pirates its just the few people on Big Time switched to it for that reason exactly.

I can get through 30-40GB on legal downloads as well. Just saying that I think there would be some people who would drastically lower their caps.

wainuitech
04-12-2009, 08:22 PM
Yup I know not everyone pirates its just the few people on Big Time switched to it for that reason exactly.

I can get through 30-40GB on legal downloads as well. Just saying that I think there would be some people who would drastically lower their caps. VERY true - I know of a few as well. :thumbs:

convair
04-12-2009, 08:33 PM
There will be many who will jump up and down and protest. Provided you buy your stuff online legally then what have you got to worry about? Only those who are doing the illegal downloads will be the one's who be may be worried.

qazwsxokmijn
04-12-2009, 08:46 PM
I'd really love to see these idiots at the entertainment industry and punch their faces in one by one, just so they understand their ancient ways of selling stuff is well....ancient. The internet is an enormous source of business....if those idiots would bother creating a fair, easy system instead of focusing on suing single moms $3 million for downloading some 20 odd songs.

ubergeek85
04-12-2009, 08:47 PM
Amen!

xyz823
04-12-2009, 09:01 PM
Firstly PIRACY ISN'T THEFT. When you steal a movie from a shop you take it and they no longer have it. Whereas piracy simple makes a copy.

So pirates aren't actually stealing as such. They are merely taking away potential profit. Notice how I use the word "potential", saying that they COULD get that money. It doesn't necessarily mean they WILL get that money.

For example, the movie 2012. I would estimate that would be over a million downloads by now. But would every single one of those million people actually PAY for the movie if they had no other choice?

How many of us can afford to spend $15 to see a movie once, or maybe $20-$30 to get it on CD. Or even $20 on an album? We are in the middle of a recession, people are tightening their belts because they dont have enough money to spend. The producers don't realise this. They want their profits to go back to pre-recession times.

So even if this law is passed I don't see profits increasing dramatically because people will instead just go without.

xyz823
04-12-2009, 09:05 PM
In saying that I still don't condone piracy but I won't look down my nose if you do.

ubergeek85
04-12-2009, 09:09 PM
They artists and movies producers don't realise this. They want their profits to go back to pre-recession times.

WRONG! WRONG!

Alot (well, some) artists agree with you. It's the record/movie companies/execs pushing this stuff through.

Artists are always going to be ripped off, piracy or not.

Same reasons that my sig (and avatar) is what it is; it's not that I want to just steal sh!t, but I'm against the corporatisation (is that a word) of content. Sure, that's not going to go away, but I might pay for mroe of my media when some of it actually goes to the artist, and I can do whatever I like with it (both in law and DRM).

--Wolf--
04-12-2009, 09:09 PM
Well put darkstar.

Lets see how many people argue with you that piracy is stealing because they've seen the start of old videos/dvds ("you wouldn't steal a car...you wouldn't steal a handbag" etc)

xyz823
04-12-2009, 09:10 PM
WRONG! WRONG!

Alot (well, some) artists agree with you. It's the record/movie companies/execs pushing this stuff through.

Artists are always going to be ripped off, piracy or not.

Same reasons that my sig (and avatar) is what it is; it's not that I want to just steal sh!t, but I'm against the corporatisation (is that a word) of content. Sure, that's not going to go away, but I might pay for mroe of my media when some of it actually goes to the artist, and I can do whatever I like with it (both in law and DRM).

When I say artists I mean to include record/movie companies.

ubergeek85
04-12-2009, 09:13 PM
Well put darkstar.

Lets see how many people argue with you that piracy is stealing because they've seen the start of old videos/dvds ("you wouldn't steal a car...you wouldn't steal a handbag" etc)

This is all the anti-piracy I need; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZZx1xmAzg

darkstar09 Interesting POV. Personally I think it's the artists getting the crumbs, but that's just my opinion.

xyz823
04-12-2009, 09:20 PM
Personally I think it's the artists getting the crumbs, but that's just my opinion.

Yep the record companies and movie producers alredy have enough money lining their gold trimmed pockets.

--Wolf--
04-12-2009, 09:30 PM
This is all the anti-piracy I need; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZZx1xmAzg

THAT is gold! :lol::lol:

wainuitech
04-12-2009, 09:59 PM
Firstly PIRACY ISN'T THEFT. Thats a statement you will NEVER win.

Take this for example -- Lets say for a moment you are a programmer - you design some program, and thousands of people want to buy it -- Now lets say you decide to make a living from selling that and other programs - say $100 per copy and you sell 5 a day.

All good while people pay for your work.

Someone puts it on the internet, and its downloaded by thousands of people - you get nothing for it and your income dries up, where if you had sold it you would get $$.

WHOS the loser - YOU!!

SO going by your theory its perfectly fine for people to pirate your work.

ubergeek85
04-12-2009, 10:03 PM
There's a difference between piracy and physical theft.

Piracy - you lose nothing, other than - possibly - profit.

Theft - you lose something.

The principle is similar though.

xyz823
04-12-2009, 10:06 PM
Thats a statement you will NEVER win.

Take this for example -- Lets say for a moment you are a programmer - you design some program, and thousands of people want to buy it -- Now lets say you decide to make a living from selling that and other programs - say $100 per copy and you sell 5 a day.

All good while people pay for your work.

Someone puts it on the internet, and its downloaded by thousands of people - you get nothing for it and your income dries up, where if you had sold it you would get $$.

WHOS the loser - YOU!!

SO going by your theory its perfectly fine for people to pirate your work.

But would those thousands of people pay for it in the first place?

convair
04-12-2009, 10:13 PM
If people don't pay for the software then the developer of the software gives up and stops developing.

xyz823
04-12-2009, 10:19 PM
If people don't pay for the software then the developer of the software gives up and stops developing.

BUT what I'm trying to say is that, most of the people who would pirate the software probably wouldn't pay for it in the first place! I'm not by any means condoning piracy.

wainuitech
04-12-2009, 10:23 PM
But would those thousands of people pay for it in the first place? Those people would be stealing your work (going by your theory thats perfectly OK) - IF it were given away and you said it was OK to give away then its not stealing, BUT those people would be taking money out of your income that you expected to be paid for.
Others would be honest and pay for what you created.

Saying its Not physical is a :lol:.

Take another option -- you work for 8 hours a day - your boss says he's only going to pay you for 5. Hes not actually taking anything physical away from you, apart from your time - time is not a physical item.

It boils down to the fact, if something that an honest person would pay for is taken without payment its stealing - doesn't matter if its a item you can hold in your hand or purchase electronically.

The movie you quoted, 2012 - least say 1 million people downloaded it illegally - the actors if it were purchased got paid a certain amount from each sale -the actors cant be paid because of piracy.

Sure the movie companies are selling movies at an over priced rate, (no disagreement there) and if they were reasonable more people would pay for them-- I'd rather pay $5 and down load a quality product rather than some pirated crappy picture/audio.

convair
04-12-2009, 10:32 PM
If you download an illegal copy of software you don't get any support from the developer because you didn't purchase the right to use the product and product support.

I'd rather fork out the money for the software or whatever and know that I'm putting money into the developers pocket so they can continue to develop the software or make more programs.

xyz823
04-12-2009, 10:48 PM
Take another option -- you work for 8 hours a day - your boss says he's only going to pay you for 5. Hes not actually taking anything physical away from you, apart from your time - time is not a physical item.

What I'm saying is more like you have an 8 hour shift but get sent home after 5 hours. You havn't lost anything EXCEPT the OPPORTUNITY to earn that money.



It boils down to the fact, if something that an honest person would pay for is taken without payment its stealing - doesn't matter if its a item you can hold in your hand or purchase electronically.

I never said anything about physical or electronic. The definition of steal is: to take the property of another wrongfully and especially as a habitual or regular practice. When pirating you are making a copy of the item. Its like if I had a magic machine that made a copy of powerdrills. Even though I never plan to buy one in the first place I have made a copy and the seller hasn't lost out because I wasn't going to pay for one in the first place.



The movie you quoted, 2012 - least say 1 million people downloaded it illegally - the actors if it were purchased got paid a certain amount from each sale -the actors cant be paid because of piracy.

So far all the money generated by this film has been from movie theatres. So far 2012 has made $141,336,196 so far at the box office. This should be enough to pay for everything. Then when you add DVD sales on top of this (and future viewings at theatres) the movie company is raking it in.

I am in no way, shape or form condoning piracy. I am merely saying that when you look into it deeper and think about it more, piracy is NOT theft. YES I agree it is bad. But if that law came into place, I don't think people would suddenly start paying for everything. Simply because they can't afford it. They would either find free alternatives or go without.

xyz823
04-12-2009, 10:53 PM
If you download an illegal copy of software you don't get any support from the developer because you didn't purchase the right to use the product and product support.

I'd rather fork out the money for the software or whatever and know that I'm putting money into the developers pocket so they can continue to develop the software or make more programs.

Proves my point exactly. You WANT to use the software so are willing to pay for it. Even if it WASN'T avalible to pirate YOU WOULD STILL BUY IT. But many of the piraters would never pay for the software in the first place. They would use freeware alternatives if they couldn't pirate the software.

Example, Microsoft Office. People don't like forking out hundreds of dollars for software. So they pirate it. But if you couldn't pirate it, many of those people would switch to open office.

The same applies to Photoshop and The Gimp. Using your theory you could even go as far to say you are making the developers of photoshop lose money because you aren't paying for their software but using something that was designed to be like photoshop.

I'm simply saying a law change won't increase profits hugely because people will find ways to not buy the software but still get the job done.

xyz823
04-12-2009, 11:12 PM
2012 has actually made $592,636,196 worldwide.

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=2012.htm

Netsukeninja
05-12-2009, 10:14 AM
ACTA is too extreme for it to work. There would be massive protests and it would give all the pirate parties a boost.

plod
05-12-2009, 12:29 PM
It would be very interesting to see here who has a legit copy of PS or other expensive software that they use for personal use.

prefect
05-12-2009, 12:30 PM
Is ps play station?

plod
05-12-2009, 12:31 PM
Is ps play station?

sorry,Photoshop

gary67
05-12-2009, 01:08 PM
I received PS elements 2 with a camera and it has been transferred every time I rebuild my computer does that count and I have genuine office 97 as got it for student rate of $80

wainuitech
05-12-2009, 01:10 PM
It would be very interesting to see here who has a legit copy of PS or other expensive software that they use for personal use. I've sold a couple of legit copies to customers ( and I mean a couple - its expensive software) - as well as the student versions of Photoshop C4 Extended (http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/photoshopextended/) to students that have a student ID. The RRP on that is $258.00 (NZ) - All Legit (http://www.adobe.com/ap/education/students/studentedition/faq.html).

Mind you some people also say its to expensive, so I suggest Gimp as a free option.

nofam
05-12-2009, 01:14 PM
My personal opinion on it is that a lot of the illegal movie downloading (for example) that I see would fall into the same category as Abandonware; i.e. it is still technically illegal to obtain it through torrents, but a DVD has never been released, and you can't buy it on VHS anymore. So if it wasn't for fans of a certain genre (say Italian horror movies), the movies would no longer be available for people who enjoy them.

As movie buffs, they'd be more than happy to pay were the movies available, and the web is the perfect distribution channel.

Metla
05-12-2009, 01:26 PM
Can I just say that the argument that"I would never pay for it anyway so its not theft" Is the biggest wank ever, and has zero logic.

Its just people trying to justify having something they have no right to.

convair
05-12-2009, 03:24 PM
At the end of the day, there will always be pirates ripping off movies, music and software. They will just become more determined to get the software illegally.

paulw
05-12-2009, 05:02 PM
There will be many who will jump up and down and protest. Provided you buy your stuff online legally then what have you got to worry about? Only those who are doing the illegal downloads will be the one's who be may be worried.

How many time have I heard that from some fascist group wanting to control things?? Hitler most likely used the same reasoning for the suppression of people in Germany..

convair
05-12-2009, 05:26 PM
How many time have I heard that from some fascist group wanting to control things?? Hitler most likely used the same reasoning for the suppression of people in Germany..

Very true

the_bogan
05-12-2009, 05:34 PM
How many time have I heard that from some fascist group wanting to control things?? Hitler most likely used the same reasoning for the suppression of people in Germany..

Hitler blamed online piracy to kill people?

Now that is a new one...

Metla
05-12-2009, 05:49 PM
He was a visionary.

He figured these people had to die as their childrens childrens childen would live in an age where they could freely access media belonging to companies so rich it was impossible to count all their money.

Terry Porritt
05-12-2009, 05:57 PM
What concerns me is probably of no interest to most people on this forum, but those of us across the world who are into old time music, old films etc are really concerned about how things have been going in the US, and how steps to prevent piracy etc impinge on our abilty to enjoy such media.

Such media is yonks old, authors/composers/performers long dead, yet the US corporate ghouls have been doing their best to stop the free release of such old stuff, and try to exert their influence around the world, not just the US.
Old films and clips get locked away, removed from YouTube etc, music sites have been pulled under influence from the US, even though local 50year copyright laws in the country of origin of the site have not been violated.

First we had the Sonny Bono Act, the "Copyright Term Extension Act" which retrospectively pulled public domain music back into copyright,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act,
then the RIAA/Sound Exchange trying to price streaming internet radio/music out of existence through trying to charge exhorbitent royalties:

"Is the RIAA Pulling a Scam on the Music Industry?"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/24/141326/870

http://www.soundexchange.com/

There has been a whole lot of skullduggery going on over the last few years by greedy corporate money grabbers in the music and film industries.

Metla
05-12-2009, 06:03 PM
What concerns me is

I'm in complete agreement that its something to be worried about, Its corruption at its highest level, and in full view of everyone.

Lets hope its the last grasp of a collapsing empire.

nofam
05-12-2009, 06:08 PM
What concerns me is probably of no interest to most people on this forum, but those of us across the world who are into old time music, old films etc are really concerned about how things have been going in the US, and how steps to prevent piracy etc impinge on our abilty to enjoy such media.

Such media is yonks old, authors/composers/performers long dead, yet the US corporate ghouls have been doing their best to stop the free release of such old stuff, and try to exert their influence around the world, not just the US.
Old films and clips get locked away, removed from YouTube etc, music sites have been pulled under influence from the US, even though local 50year copyright laws in the country of origin of the site have not been violated.

First we had the Sonny Bono Act, the "Copyright Term Extension Act" which retrospectively pulled public domain music back into copyright,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act,
then the RIAA/Sound Exchange trying to price streaming internet radio/music out of existence through trying to charge exhorbitent royalties:

"Is the RIAA Pulling a Scam on the Music Industry?"

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/24/141326/870

http://www.soundexchange.com/

There has been a whole lot of skullduggery going on over the last few years by greedy corporate money grabbers in the music and film industries.

That's exactly the point I was trying to make with my post earlier Terry! :thumbs:

mikebartnz
06-12-2009, 11:00 PM
What about the Pom or Scottish guy who put his own song on Youtube and one of the labels put a take down notice on it. For one they had no right and to boot one of the labels had also been copying his music illegally.

prefect
06-12-2009, 11:06 PM
How many time have I heard that from some fascist group wanting to control things?? Hitler most likely used the same reasoning for the suppression of people in Germany..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Battleneter2
07-12-2009, 08:32 AM
The loss $ due to Piracy is calculated on the assumption anything pirated "would" have been purchased by the user if they couldn't pirate. This of course is very incorrect. The games and movie industry are making a ton more money than a decade ago and yet piracy has increased!

Most people have a limited amount to spend on entertainment, most that pirate still spend there limited funds on going to the movies, buying DVD's and games they like the most.

The large corporation driving these law changes are badly misguided.

xyz823
07-12-2009, 09:31 AM
The loss $ due to Piracy is calculated on the assumption anything pirated "would" have been purchased by the user if they couldn't pirate. This of course is very incorrect. The games and movie industry are making a ton more money than a decade ago and yet piracy has increased!

Most people have a limited amount to spend on entertainment, most that pirate still spend there limited funds on going to the movies, buying DVD's and games they like the most.

The large corporation driving these law changes are badly misguided.

EXACTLY what I have been trying to say!!!

If only I could have put it like that lol.

convair
07-12-2009, 09:37 AM
EXACTLY what I have been trying to say!!!

If only I could have put it like that lol.

x2