It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Feds shut down nine websites in movie piracy crackdown

page: 24
31
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by debunky
 


WHO supplied the videos to the first video store.! Where I live it was a distributor who had the rights.

What you claim is a MONOPOLY is NOT if a company makes a sci -fi film YOU COULD TO and if people thought yours was better they would go to watch yours or buy the dvd etc.

There is NOT only one movie company SO there is more than one option for YOU or anyone else.

You pay your money for the good or services you wish to have from ONE film company or the goods and services from another.

If you do not wish to pay for the goods or services YOU are not entitled to them.

I would really like to know what you do for a living probably nothing becuase it seem you think you are entitled to take what you want for nothing!


It isn't a monopoly of the market but of that product. Lucas has a monopoly on Star Wars. Even if I could make you a copy of any of the Star Wars episodes for $5 I am not allowed by copyright. That means Lucas can keep his price per DVD artificially elevated because no one can compete with him.




posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by debunky

I am tired of teaching the basics of economics here. Look it up. Ask google: Rival goods, Non Rival goods, monopoly, substitution, price and marginal cost of production are the terms you will want to look up. It might be educational.


I ran a business with my hubby for 20 years.

All I can say is what they teach in school is total BS. It has nothing to do with the real life experience of running a business.

Whatever you found on Google - - is laughable.

Its total crap. A real life business is hard core. You want a real life education - - run your own business.

I heard in Europe you pay for your food before it is served. I don't know if that's true - - buy sure hope it is.

The entitlement attitude of some people is beyond amazing. We had one customer who thought we should build him a computer for free because he worked at a church. After several "visits" and finally accepting the answer was NO! He cussed us up one side and down the other.

We've had customers come in and tell us "you are the best computer service in town" - - but the other guy charges $10 less - - even though I have to take it back 4 or 5 times to get it right.

HUH? Real life. Real business experience.

So don't bother me with your "Economics" "Rival and non-Rival Goods" - - its just a bunch of words run together.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 06:42 PM
link   
no need for insults see:
im not from an english speaking country,so that entitles me with "grammar immunity"

and i fit in a broken society well because i live in a broken country,where everyone steals games and movies.

hey i wish i could buy a really good movie or a game i like,but with a salary of 225 euro per month,and 200 euro small apartment rent,....
would..you...be..any..different...?

o and dont forget here everyone on the streets wants to fight for no reason and wants to make you miserable..true story.

but then you forget the evil companyes who only want to make money off your back selling you cr*p^^
you really agree that "kick ass" is a good movie? you wanna go pay money for it? i mean really? another movie that makes the american teen feel like a virgin who will never "get laid" wow what a great movie.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   
ah....by the way i have to say,being a pirate,and a good person at the same time,all that set aside, i prefer paying 10$ for good service (friendly face,smile,chatter,even if its fake) then some sourpuss screaming at me like he dosnt want me as a client) so yea



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by debunky
 


WHO supplied the videos to the first video store.! Where I live it was a distributor who had the rights.

What you claim is a MONOPOLY is NOT if a company makes a sci -fi film YOU COULD TO and if people thought yours was better they would go to watch yours or buy the dvd etc.

There is NOT only one movie company SO there is more than one option for YOU or anyone else.

You pay your money for the good or services you wish to have from ONE film company or the goods and services from another.

If you do not wish to pay for the goods or services YOU are not entitled to them.

I would really like to know what you do for a living probably nothing becuase it seem you think you are entitled to take what you want for nothing!


Thats the problem.
I have 300 € hardware standing here, and pay 40 € a month for interent. I do a better job at distributing than any professional can claim.

Non rival good: If there are 10 apples, and I eat one, you can only eat 9.
It's a rival good.

A song being broadcast on the radio: Me listening to it, and enjoying it, does not affect your enjoyment:
It is a non rival good.

You decide to perform your ranting skills live. You find a tough big guy, and put a fence around your performance. You instruct the guy to not let me in, unless I pay 1000$.
That is an excludable good.

You forget the fence, and the tough guy, and perform your skills in a malls parking lot.
That is a non excludable good.

Economists didn't make up these labels because they were bored. They realized that these categories affect price and profit. In the past few decades data has become harder to make excludable. In a free market this has to affect price.
The real question is: to encourage content producers to produce content we grant them a monopoly for a limited time. Is what we grant them now too much, too little, just right? I say too much. 5 years was considered enough 400 years ago, when distribution costs were much higher. today we are averaging at 150 years.
Another problem is with marginal costs of production approaching 0. The perfect strategy for a content producer is not to produce as much content as possible, but to produce as little as necessary and sell it as often as possible, to maximize profit.
I don't blame him, I would do the same, but that is not why we granted the exclusive right to distribute and produce copies. Proucers reneged on social contract. It is time for punishment.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Stillalive
 


I appreciate your honesty. BTW - I think Aziz is very talented and entertaining.

My friend married a "mail order bride" from China. It fascinates me how "black market" her mentality is. When "things" are denied - - people always find a way. It becomes a whole sub-culture in itself.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by debunky

I am tired of teaching the basics of economics here. Look it up. Ask google: Rival goods, Non Rival goods, monopoly, substitution, price and marginal cost of production are the terms you will want to look up. It might be educational.


I ran a business with my hubby for 20 years.

All I can say is what they teach in school is total BS. It has nothing to do with the real life experience of running a business.

Whatever you found on Google - - is laughable.

Its total crap. A real life business is hard core. You want a real life education - - run your own business.

I heard in Europe you pay for your food before it is served. I don't know if that's true - - buy sure hope it is.

The entitlement attitude of some people is beyond amazing. We had one customer who thought we should build him a computer for free because he worked at a church. After several "visits" and finally accepting the answer was NO! He cussed us up one side and down the other.

We've had customers come in and tell us "you are the best computer service in town" - - but the other guy charges $10 less - - even though I have to take it back 4 or 5 times to get it right.

HUH? Real life. Real business experience.

So don't bother me with your "Economics" "Rival and non-Rival Goods" - - its just a bunch of words run together.



... why do you settle for less than "everything you own" then?

ohohoh: do you serve storagetek customers?

Again:
Who is the thief in cinemas vs video stores?

[edit on 9-7-2010 by debunky]



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 07:02 PM
link   
wow a mail wife,it has crossed my though too,but everyone waits to meet someone more unique xD

there has always been a conspiracy against talent,against quality. and you see every year not very advanced tech,and always flaws and repititive entartainment.
3D was out WAY BACK,why didnt they made every movie in 3d,but they started just now,and theyr only making some of the more crappy cartoons in 3d,so you can watch them,because its the only thing in "3d",and since it would be your first time seeing somethng in 3d you say,"heh who cares if only cr*ppy kid stuff are in 3d right now,lets give it a try to see some cool 3d effects"



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stillalive
wow a mail wife,it has crossed my though too,but everyone waits to meet someone more unique xD

there has always been a conspiracy against talent,against quality. and you see every year not very advanced tech,and always flaws and repititive entartainment._javascript:gvid()
3D was out WAY BACK,why didnt they made every movie in 3d,but they started just now,and theyr only making some of the more crappy cartoons in 3d,so you can watch them,because its the only thing in "3d",and since it would be your first time seeing somethng in 3d you say,"heh who cares if only cr*ppy kid stuff are in 3d right now,lets give it a try to see some cool 3d effects"



Off topic: Yes - 3D happened back in the 50s/60s - I think. Plus - "experience" theater. They put boxes under seats in theaters to simulate earthquakes - or something like that. Can't remember details off hand. But people then were even more into a false reality then they are today. There were lawsuits against these "fake experiences". People really weren't ready.l



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by debunky
The real question is: to encourage content producers to produce content we grant them a monopoly for a limited time. Is what we grant them now too much, too little, just right? I say too much. 5 years was considered enough 400 years ago, when distribution costs were much higher. today we are averaging at 150 years.


I just heard that Toy Story 3 made 320 Million in it's first week. It cost 200 Million to make so they have already made 120 Million in profit.

How about instead of time, profit decides copyright limit. Say 100% profit so when Toy Story 3 hits 400Million it goes public and any company can compete for the sale of the DVD. If a movie goes to DVD without reaching 100% then they keep copyright for X years or until they reach 100%

[edit on 9-7-2010 by daskakik]



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Good help us if you apply your logic to everything you do!


God help us if you keep attempting to apply digital logic to PHYSICAL items.

Is it that hard to understand?

One is physical and requires capital to produce. It is consumable, meaning it depreciates in quality over time.

DIGITAL IS IDENTICAL FOREVER. NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO. IT NEVER CHANGES. NEVER AGES. NEVER DAMAGES. IF SOMEONE "STOLE" IT, IT IS NEVER TAKEN.

How can you even attempt to compare digital items to REAL WORLD items. Oh my god.



posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 09:15 PM
link   
Wow. As an independent filmmaker all this sense of entitlement is just astonishing. It costs money to make movies, money that is made up through either theatre screenings, dvd rentals and sales, or in some cases LEGAL download sites. People who post home videos of their dog peeing on the mailman's leg on youtube do so without any need to recoup profits, and they post it of their own free will. If you only want to watch movies or documentaries that you don't have to pay for (and most movie rentals are less than $3 each these days, for chrissakes), you can always go watch sleepy kittens, sneezing pandas, and teenage girls complaining about their day, on youtube, legally.

Despite my distaste for the Hollywood studio system, all those flashy big-budget movies with the car chases and name-brand stars cost millions of dollars to make, and even they're entitled to make a profit on their crap (if you don't want to pay for crap, pay for something else, like an indie or non-American film).

Or how about this? If you feel so entitled to every creative piece of work any artist puts out, we could have the government subsidize the movie industry, and the music industry (they do this to some extent in France, I hear). And then we could all just pay more taxes, regardless of whether or not we actually *want* to see the next crappy romantic comedy starring Kate Hudson. That's fair, right?



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by burdenofdreams
Wow. As an independent filmmaker all this sense of entitlement is just astonishing. It costs money to make movies, money that is made up through either theatre screenings, dvd rentals and sales, or in some cases LEGAL download sites. People who post home videos of their dog peeing on the mailman's leg on youtube do so without any need to recoup profits, and they post it of their own free will. If you only want to watch movies or documentaries that you don't have to pay for (and most movie rentals are less than $3 each these days, for chrissakes), you can always go watch sleepy kittens, sneezing pandas, and teenage girls complaining about their day, on youtube, legally.

Despite my distaste for the Hollywood studio system, all those flashy big-budget movies with the car chases and name-brand stars cost millions of dollars to make, and even they're entitled to make a profit on their crap (if you don't want to pay for crap, pay for something else, like an indie or non-American film).

Or how about this? If you feel so entitled to every creative piece of work any artist puts out, we could have the government subsidize the movie industry, and the music industry (they do this to some extent in France, I hear). And then we could all just pay more taxes, regardless of whether or not we actually *want* to see the next crappy romantic comedy starring Kate Hudson. That's fair, right?


A monopoly that will last longer than the life of your grandchildren isn't enough? Me paying you money for every blank CD or DVD i buy isn't enough? Now you want the power to collect taxes???

Ok, I am not suprised. Copyright agencies have been known to pretend that they are the law. ("FBI-Warning", for example that is neither from nor about the FBI)

But honestly: You are not entitled to profit. Nobody is. You can do everything in your power to try, but in the end the consumer decides how many dollars he gives you.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 04:28 AM
link   
You aren't going to find a lot of sympathy from me when it comes to pirating sites going down. What they were doing was illegal. Breaching of copyright takes money from the companies. Companies who not only pay the over-priced actors and directors whom people seem to loathe (but for some reason love to watch) but also the battalion of skilled and low paid workers in film, music, and television. People like staff writers, costume and props department, special effects, editors, production assistants, boom mike operators, camera crew, etc etc. The money is taken out of their pockets when people pirate films, not from the execs. It's their jobs whose are the first to be cut when profits simply aren't coming in like they used to. It's their careers that are hurt, not the actors, not the studios.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 05:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by debunky
 


WHO supplied the videos to the first video store.! Where I live it was a distributor who had the rights.

What you claim is a MONOPOLY is NOT if a company makes a sci -fi film YOU COULD TO and if people thought yours was better they would go to watch yours or buy the dvd etc.

There is NOT only one movie company SO there is more than one option for YOU or anyone else.

You pay your money for the good or services you wish to have from ONE film company or the goods and services from another.

If you do not wish to pay for the goods or services YOU are not entitled to them.

I would really like to know what you do for a living probably nothing becuase it seem you think you are entitled to take what you want for nothing!


It isn't a monopoly of the market but of that product. Lucas has a monopoly on Star Wars. Even if I could make you a copy of any of the Star Wars episodes for $5 I am not allowed by copyright. That means Lucas can keep his price per DVD artificially elevated because no one can compete with him.



DO you actually THINK Star Wars is original

Lets see bad guys take princess good guys go rescue her.
Yeh! Your right I have never heard or saw a story like that before!
How many other films or books have a similar plot LINE


Locations change ,characters change, plot structure changes.

So lets see Shrek

Bad guys take princess Good GUYS RESCUE HER
F*%K its Star Wars someone tell George Lucas


I can go into HMV in the UK this weekend and buy the following for £3 about $4.50

For example

Christina Aguilera Keeps Gettin Better: A Decade Of Hits
Black Eyed Peas The End
Sex & The City: The Movie
Rocknrolla
Enchanted
What Happens In Vegas


So if your TO TIGHT to buy at launch you wait a few months and get it in the bargain bin.

Hundreds of cd's and movies price bands in pounds
2.99, 3.99, 4.99, 5.99, 6.99

I have NOT seen one GOOD reason here on why a person or company who have a product SHOULD not be entitled to sell it for a profit,
After all its people like you and me that earn a living working for them well thats if you actually have a JOB!
I would really like to see what you guys who have this attitude actually do for a living THAT would be really interesting I would like to see your reaction to someome taking money from YOU, I DONT THINK IT WOULD BE THE SAME!

WOULD IT




posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by debunky

Copyright agencies have been known to pretend that they are the law. ("FBI-Warning", for example that is neither from nor about the FBI)

But honestly: You are not entitled to profit. Nobody is. You can do everything in your power to try, but in the end the consumer decides how many dollars he gives you.


Why do you say the FBI warning/label is not the FBI?

"Copyright" is the law. Agencies are only facilitators.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Abbreviated Warning: “FBI Anti-Piracy Warning: Unauthorized Copying Is Punishable Under Federal Law.”

Extended Warning: “The unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this copyrighted work is illegal. Criminal copyright infringement, including infringement without monetary gain, is investigated by the FBI and is punishable by up to 5 years in federal prison and a fine of $250,000.”

FBI Anti-Piracy Seal & Warning: Because of the substantial losses to the recording industry as the result of piracy, the RIAA worked closely with the FBI to develop a new government seal and warning for placement on copyrighted music products in order to increase anti-piracy awareness. The new seal and warning are similar to the warning consumers were previously accustomed to viewing before a home movie on VHS or DVD. In late 2003, the FBI and the RIAA signed an agreement creating the new seal and warning and outlining the terms of their use. The FBI has expanded the program across different media content . . .


www.riaa.com...

[edit on 10-7-2010 by Annee]



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by debunky
 


WHO supplied the videos to the first video store.! Where I live it was a distributor who had the rights.

What you claim is a MONOPOLY is NOT if a company makes a sci -fi film YOU COULD TO and if people thought yours was better they would go to watch yours or buy the dvd etc.

There is NOT only one movie company SO there is more than one option for YOU or anyone else.

You pay your money for the good or services you wish to have from ONE film company or the goods and services from another.

If you do not wish to pay for the goods or services YOU are not entitled to them.

I would really like to know what you do for a living probably nothing becuase it seem you think you are entitled to take what you want for nothing!


It isn't a monopoly of the market but of that product. Lucas has a monopoly on Star Wars. Even if I could make you a copy of any of the Star Wars episodes for $5 I am not allowed by copyright. That means Lucas can keep his price per DVD artificially elevated because no one can compete with him.



DO you actually THINK Star Wars is original

Lets see bad guys take princess good guys go rescue her.
Yeh! Your right I have never heard or saw a story like that before!
How many other films or books have a similar plot LINE


Locations change ,characters change, plot structure changes.

So lets see Shrek

Bad guys take princess Good GUYS RESCUE HER
F*%K its Star Wars someone tell George Lucas


I can go into HMV in the UK this weekend and buy the following for £3 about $4.50

For example

Christina Aguilera Keeps Gettin Better: A Decade Of Hits
Black Eyed Peas The End
Sex & The City: The Movie
Rocknrolla
Enchanted
What Happens In Vegas


So if your TO TIGHT to buy at launch you wait a few months and get it in the bargain bin.

Hundreds of cd's and movies price bands in pounds
2.99, 3.99, 4.99, 5.99, 6.99

I have NOT seen one GOOD reason here on why a person or company who have a product SHOULD not be entitled to sell it for a profit,
After all its people like you and me that earn a living working for them well thats if you actually have a JOB!
I would really like to see what you guys who have this attitude actually do for a living THAT would be really interesting I would like to see your reaction to someome taking money from YOU, I DONT THINK IT WOULD BE THE SAME!

WOULD IT



Doesnt your foot start hurting with all those bullets in it?
Yes: the 5 act structure was invented by Aristoteles. We don't pay him or his decendants royalties for it.
Since you keep bringing up my Job: I was a journalist for 10 years. Now I work as a code monkey.
So yes. I do have a Job. Funny enough it is in the creative industry. Did you ever work in any creative position?



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Oooops. you are right!
www.fbi.gov...
Sorry, my bad.
Ok, since 2006 they are real warnings, if they carry the seal.
I hope you an excuse that little blunder. As you know, I never get to see those...



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by debunky
reply to post by Annee
 


Oooops. you are right!
www.fbi.gov...
Sorry, my bad.
Ok, since 2006 they are real warnings, if they carry the seal.
I hope you an excuse that little blunder. As you know, I never get to see those...


No Prob.

We are all in this crazy mixed-up world together.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by WolfofWar
You aren't going to find a lot of sympathy from me when it comes to pirating sites going down. What they were doing was illegal. Breaching of copyright takes money from the companies. Companies who not only pay the over-priced actors and directors whom people seem to loathe (but for some reason love to watch) but also the battalion of skilled and low paid workers in film, music, and television. People like staff writers, costume and props department, special effects, editors, production assistants, boom mike operators, camera crew, etc etc. The money is taken out of their pockets when people pirate films, not from the execs. It's their jobs whose are the first to be cut when profits simply aren't coming in like they used to. It's their careers that are hurt, not the actors, not the studios.


I don't condone piracy, or partake in it (for many years). I had hoped to simply avoid having to show my hand and have logic win most of you over. But you all hide behind your own personal feelings. And not truly what is right or wrong.

Or even factual.

It has been proven piracy does not impact jobs when it comes to creating movies. Because as simply stated before. Movies recoup all their costs, and then millions of dollars in profit in just the opening weekend.

When it comes to people actually buying the product to watch at their whim, that is simply additional revenue. Everyone involved with making the movie has already been paid.

I've seen the MPAA PSA's regarding people talking about losing jobs to piracy. It is a blatant lie of a campaign decide to win you over using emotions rather than logic.

MUCH LIKE THEIR MOVIES.

No money is taken from anyones pockets from movie piracy. Money is taken from the corporations profit margin. Not the people involved with any part of production.

So it isn't their careers that are hurt, or the actors, or the studios. It's that of the right holder who had absolutely nothing to do with the actual production.

They are merely middle men between people and those who actually create the so-called "talent".

[edit on 10-7-2010 by mryanbrown]



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join