Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

It's not Piracy they're against, it's distribution for Independents they fear!

Status
Not open for further replies.
The notion that most piracy is from people who wouldn't buy it is true... but it's also true that a lot of people who would buy it no longer buy it. I've talked to friends who went from having a profitable product and company to barely making ends meet after cracks were released.

This doesn't just hurt the company selling the software it also harms those who *DID* buy the software. Let's say you're a video editor and you need to stay up to date on software every year. That's potentially a $5k expense every year in software. Now let's say someone pirates their software, they can now undercut you by $5k in pricing every year making you less competitive. So the people actually paying lose to those who pirate and the market gets less and less legitimate.

I don't find stealing a very good analogy either though. I like my speeding ticket analogy. It's really easy to do and it doesn't directly cost anyone anything... and without enforcement there would be widespread breaking of the law. The problem is that it's risk free. It needs to be a cost/benefit analysis. "Pirating this movie will cost me $0 now and a 33% chance of paying $30 when I get caught" or "Buying this movie will cost me $10 now." Until it costs the average user more to pirate than to buy it'll remain as it is today.
 
M Most said:
Actually, that's not how it works. Things like DVD and streaming sales are vitally important for crew members who work under a union contract because the health plan is largely funded by those things in the form of residuals. And before you say "only writers, directors, and actors get residuals", that's not the case. Residuals are paid to every craft under an IA contract as well as the DGA, WGA, and SAG/AFTRA contract. The difference is that residuals are paid directly to the artists in the case of the writers, directors and actors, but they are paid into a general fund in the case of the IA locals. That fund allows the health and pension plan to exist, as well as other things provided by Contract Services, such as the safety program. So the next time someone who works on a crew tells you that he or she doesn't get residuals, or that piracy doesn't affect their ability to continue their career and have things like health insurance, or that the rise of digital piracy only affects studios, you'll know that's not the case. And I encourage you to let them know, too.
Click to expand...

Please be smart and understand that this is not just about your country. How it works in your country is not how it works in the rest of the world. A little common sense in this discussion is good, no?
 
I guess everyone here is aware they arrested Kim Dotcom, founder and owner of MegaUploads today in New Zealand. This is the kind of piracy that should be targeted, and obviously was done so within the laws that exist already. The mom and pop Pirate-loss could be just considered the cost of doing business, but the Mega-Pirates must be pursued to the end.

But in the event there is a law of some sort passed, it should definitely have a sunset clause.
 
Last edited:
Steve G said:
Good luck with earning a living from your chosen profession in the future, if everyone else does as you do.
Click to expand...

Believe me, I'm happy for getting paid my salary for doing my film. Residuals can go to charity for all I care, I'm not greedy, I'll only charge for my work. If someone wants to sell my film on Netflix or whatever, I'm happy for the people who watch it, either for free or not. The entire industry behind selling films after the theatre presentations, better adapt to the new world. People always complain about the 'poor artists' that get ripped. Nonsense. Utter stupid nonsense. Greedy men and women can all go to hell for all I care.
 
António Fagundes said:
Believe me, I'm happy for getting paid my salary for doing my film. Residuals can go to charity for all I care, I'm not greedy, I'll only charge for my work. If someone wants to sell my film on Netflix or whatever, I'm happy for the people who watch it, either for free or not. The entire industry behind selling films after the theatre presentations, better adapt to the new world. People always complain about the 'poor artists' that get ripped. Nonsense. Utter stupid nonsense. Greedy men and women can all go to hell for all I care.
Click to expand...

Wise up. Your pay cheque is a result of all parts of the revenue stream. If you are happy working for free in the future, then keep on stealing other peoples work and advocating that others should do the same.
 
Makes sense - people know what SOPA is now, and obviously oppose it (regardless of their actual understanding of it or its consequences).

I very seriously doubt that the MPAA, RIAA, et al. are just going to pack up their bags now, however. This bill, in one form or another, will continue to reappear until an effective* anti-piracy solution is found or until people stop caring about IP and no longer bother to try to make a living with the expression of ideas.

*The idea of an effective anti-piracy solution is nebulous, at best.

The tried and true just isn't working - if any company finds someone who has stolen their product and can prove it, they can sue. And apparently pirates are just swarming out there; it sounds like everyone under the age of 30 must be a pirate of at least a couple hundred films and a few thousand songs. But the problem is, litigation seems to extremely expensive and companies can't seem to prove anyone stole anything in what would amount to a financially viable rate of success. So they must look to make that money elsewhere.

Does it make it impossible for anyone to pirate content? So far, DRM has really only hurt the legitimate and lawful end-users by restricting their access to content they own - er, sorry - "are licensed to view/experience under authorized conditions". This would be like encrypting a book and providing every legal owner a cipher - except that the "bad people" can break the cipher too (and often more effectively). So it still gets stolen, but now the legal purchasers have to jump through hoops just to read it as intended.

Does it make content providers (i.e., websites) responsible for keeping illegal information off the internet? If so, imagine the impact...even on a place like REDUSER. Every single post here would have to be moderated by a human prior to posting, lest it contain a copyright infringing image or a link to copyright infringing music or video. Social networking (and to a large extent, social interaction) on the internet would simply have to stop. Either that or our unemployment problem would be over and we could start an entire internet piracy monitoring industry. This would be akin to having a special police force that stalks the streets, invisible to the naked eye, just listening to conversations to see if anyone might admit to having a copy of something stolen. Effective? In theory, it sounds great. It practice, a nightmare.

It's a mess.
 
Any news on PIPA?
 
Steve G said:
Wise up. Your pay cheque is a result of all parts of the revenue stream. If you are happy working for free in the future, then keep on stealing other peoples work and advocating that others should do the same.
Click to expand...

I'm not stealing anybody's work. It's up online, nothing illegal in my country. Film makers get paid their salaries on the investors money. The investors make their money back, largely on ticket sales. Dvd's are largely profitable to third party entities.

Anyways, the bill is dead, as it should be. The world would be a much better place if US would once and for all stop acting like they want and need to police the entire world... I don't get to vote, so it's not fair that I get affected in my house by other country's politic decisions. I'm sure you wouldn't want that the other way around either. Absolutely love the country, have some great friends there, but its politicians are just crazy (as they are all over the world for that matter...) Politics and freedom, both have a long history...

By the way, here's what 'poor' artists think of Megaupload and 'piracy' for that matter.... http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/music_stars_in_upload_of_trouble_cpoHrLbEe7gr3Od5XcF9BL
 
Last edited:
António Fagundes said:
Please be smart and understand that this is not just about your country. How it works in your country is not how it works in the rest of the world. A little common sense in this discussion is good, no?
Click to expand...

Common sense tells me that the people who produce a project (and hire all the set-builders, grips, p.a.'s, caterers, etc.) need to recoup their expenses - or else they will have to stop hiring all the set-builders, grips, p.a.'s, caterers, etc. DVD's (and increasingly VOD), are an essential component of the revenue stream, without which most producers would not be confident about breaking even.
 
Kwan Khan said:
Any news on PIPA?
Click to expand...

It might be coming on the floor soon, but if so, my guess is to kill it - in its present form. The sponsors need to totally rework it. Though some of the intentions might have been true-minded, it was an odious bill.
 
António Fagundes said:
Dvd's are largely profitable to third party entities.
Click to expand...
Last time I heard, DVD sales make out an important part of the revenue for the studio/producer. I did a brief google, and found no reports that support your claim.

If anything, I found the opposite to be true:
And the studios get a much bigger cut of DVD revenues than they do of theatrical revenues, because the retailers aren't as "significant of a middle man" as the theater owners, according to Paul Dergarabedian, president of Hollywood.com's Box Office division. There are a lot of costs that go into running a movie theater, and showing movies is all the movie theater does — unlike most places where DVDs are sold.
Click to expand...
 
Martin Weiss said:
Last time I heard, DVD sales make out an important part of the revenue for the studio/producer. I did a brief google, and found no reports that support your claim.

If anything, I found the opposite to be true:
Click to expand...

If that's the case Martin, and it sure looks like so, then how did the Motion Picture industry thrive before the all home video appeared? Ticket sales, right? Now, if this 'new' home video business helped make the industry stronger and healthier, then that's fine, it really is, but if the world is pushing it to a whole new direction, then what do you think should be done? Use police force to control it or come up with a new business model? History tells us, time and time again, that industries have to adapt, just like Red is forcing Kodak to adapt... You don't want a group of regulators to come up now and decide what should be shot on Red or Kodak do you?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not into anarchy, I'm just realistic to what 99% of the world population believes is their right, against only monetary interests of a few, that in itself, can't be right. That's where this discussion gets interesting, because in my view, even if I don't agree or if I'm part of the smacked minority, I know I'll have to adapt to what the rest of the world is pushing for.

In the future the US can easily pass a bill like SOPA, with its almost 'abstract' regulations, but it will come at the price of US citizens tax payers money to police the world to serve only a minority... isn't that ridiculously unfair?

If a few rich people want to police the world, why don't they target child extreme poverty? Why do they have to target only what they believe will be profitable to them? All this at the cost of less freedom and less democracy to the rest of the world. That's what creates unwanted, negative tension between people.

Both US and world citizens feel ripped off and forced to be in the middle of what some country's government decides. In democracy, the government exists to serve the people, but what is happening is that people are being forced to serve the government only because of the interest of a few heavy corporations. That's not right, no matter in what country that happens.

That's what pisses me off...
 
Last edited:
Some great points here...... sure hope this dont turn personal ..... as a simple Tasmanian farmer my view is this i dont trust trailers........I only need to see the first 15 - 20 min of a film to know if i like it there for ill buy it.......i also have lots of fresh eggs if anyone is interested ?
 
Dvd's still sell by th millions worldwide. So do Blu-rays. The Apple iTunes store has billions in profits. Piracy is still considered illegal in most countries. I don't see a big problem with how things are right now. Want better DVD sales? Give better value to costumers. And make a great film worth buying and collecting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top