I have one question - I've never downloaded a movie - frankly if I want to see a movie I'll go to the comfort of my local cinema with it's superior sound and humungous screen - or watch it on a DVD with my surround sound system.
Television shows are another matter though... If I download a TV show - it's illegal? Wasn't this the same about 'recording tv shows on VHS video?' - technically it was illegal - but no one gave a crap.
To watch Trek and Stargate etc. I have to RELY on the net now. Australia is just terrible when it comes to airing these shows (OK it's not TOO bad with Stargate-SG1).
So they make bittorrents illegal - how am I to watch my favourite shows? BUY them - spend the well over 3000 bucks on videos that I did for DS9 and Voyager so I could watch my favourite TV shows - three years before it's crappily aired on FTA TV?
Get someone to tape the episodes for me in the US and send them by mail? Aha but that's STILL illegal.
How am I 'losing' them money? Oh I don't give them ratings/watch their advertisements - but being overseas I don't give them ratings ANYWAY.
PLUS I thought the thing with torrents were that they were directly P2P - no central server involved?
So What I'm saying is - I can see their point on movies. TV I cannot. Again, they think that the US is the center of the world. They have no qualms of course letting networks in Australia bandy their product around with no reguard to it's viewing public - knowing (and probably encourging them to do so) that the many thousands of fans are going to make them bucketloads of money on buy thier tapes - and NOW on top of that the DVDs!?!?!?! (and then it'll be Blue-rays).
Andrew
P.S. I haven't bought any Trek tv series DVDs - each box ~$AUS235 - I've already spent... hmmm about $4000 dollars on obselete VHS videos.
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: PLUS I thought the thing with torrents were that they were directly P2P - no central server involved.
Well, not really. See, the old P2P services used a central server to keep track of all the files that were available. You'd query it to find out what was around and who had it, then you'd go to the actual peer and download it. Thus, the main weakness is that you have a big central server that knows what everyone has and who they are.
With bittorrent, you first download the torrent file which tells you what tracker to connect to and how the files you want to download are organised along with hash values/checksums to verify what you download is valid. Next the tracker works like a traffic controller, it tells clients who they can connect to and what the have, but only for that one file.
(I'm obviously over-simplifying a bit)
This means that they can still target the tracker and website, but its not quite as easy as it used to be.
Its the equivalent of targeting the Yellow Pages for promoting prostitution because you can copy down a phone number that leads you to an escort service who can then direct you to a hooker.
This of course means that a previous thread here, in which we were told not to link to torrent-hosting sites would be the equivalent of banning posters that direct you towards the aforementioned Yellow Pages, but I digress.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
On the issue of morality, rather than the law. I would have to say I have the least sympathy for TPTB when it comes to tv piracy as compared to movie or game piracy.
When you pirate a game or a movie, its usually lost income for the artist/writer/actor. Thats one less movie ticket or sale. However, at least in my case, we're already paying for satellite TV. I could technically see 95% of the shows I download if I had the time to watch 20 minutes of commercials per 60 minutes and had the time to plan exactly when I can watch TV. It does not affect the satellite TV company because I'm still paying for that, it does not affect the actor/writer since they get paid via royalties/residuals that are based off numbers from Neilson families, of which I am not a part of.
(The other 5% is stuff like BSG which I cannot watch no matter what service I subscribe to)
I gain time, the satellite TV company still gets paid, the Internet company gets more money, the writer/actor gets exposure which encourages me to buy merchandise and/or DVDs. Who loses?
The easy answer is the advertisers...but wait. They cannot tell whether I'm watching the commercials anyways and whether I watch them or not, I do not affect the Neilson ratings which indirectly determine the ad-rates.
posted
Its the equivalent of targeting the Yellow Pages for promoting prostitution because you can copy down a phone number that leads you to an escort service who can then direct you to a hooker.
I'm not commenting at this time on the legality of such services. Just pointing out that the yellow pages contain quite a few things besides escort services. It'd be more like targeting a directory specifically of such services, which might be a bit more understandable.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I dunno. I remember reading that the BMI and other groups-that-seem-to-do-something-even-though-I'm-not-sure-what are going to start cracking down in a US-ass kicking style manner. Although that might have been just music.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
BMI is one of the many "societies" that have taken it upon themselves to "protect intellectual property" by monitoring all performances of music to which they "control" the rights and collecting and distributing royalties to their members, and basically act on behalf of copyright holders for a cut of the profit.
Anyway, my thoughts on the music industry aside, this really is no different from when the video tape recorder was introduced and Hollywood & Co were screaming bloody murder that it would destroy their business because no-one would ever visit a cinema again and blablabla (or, analogous to that, from when compact disc rewriters began entering the mainstream not too long ago and sparked a modest controversy over how they should be legislated (which is why you now pay a tax over blank CDs and DVDs, like you did over casettes)), except this time they perceive file sharing technology as The Threat because it's a means of content distribution that's not under their direct control. It isn't about missed advertising income at all.
(RIAA, of course, has been at the center of the anti-P2P movement ever since the episode with Napster, and is part of the reason such services are being so aggressively targeted by other industries today.)
-------------------- ".mirrorS arE morE fuN thaN televisioN" - TEH PNIK FLAMIGNO
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I do wonder what would have happened if Star Wars and it's "OMG CINEMA IS REALLY COOL AND BIG AND ULTRA SPECIAL-EFFECTEY"-ness hadn't come along. Cinema tickets were in decline. Would the industry really have transformed into a purely-for-TV entity? (Not that I'm blaming blank tapes, since sales had been dropping way before they became anywhere near commonplace).
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Star Wars was big, but I don't think it single-handedly saved cinema from total collapse (Empire and Jedi each only grossed half of Hope, for instance, and ET obliterated both). If Lucas hadn't invented the blockbuster, Spielberg would have.
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Meh. They cracked down on Napster and Kazaa before. Even if somehow they manage to bring BitTorrent tracker-sites down, there will be something else in it's place. And there'll always be Usenet and IRC.
They can scare people, but to really stop filesharing, you can do two things: Arrest the entire Internet-savvy population or dismantle the internet.
posted
Actually, Spielberg is usually credited with creating the modern blockbuster movie when he did Jaws.
My wife tells me off for BitTorrenting Enterprise, because she thinks it must be illegal copyright breach or something. I notice she doesn't tell me off for BitTorrenting 24 or NCIS, which we both watch.
posted
It'd be much simpler for everyone if they would do that. Just download the ep you want with ads stuck in it, say in what would otherwise be a black bar on your screen. They know far more accurately how many people watch, and thus what to charge for the ads.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
