Your take on downloading movies

Tools    





And this is my BOOMstick!
I go out see, buy and rent many movies, so I don't see why I can't download a movie or two.
__________________
"All I have in this world is my balls and my word, and I don't break them for no one."



Originally Posted by dankphishin
I download many, many more movies than I pay for, by far. I don't know why people are complaining about quality, if you know what to look for it's easy to get good stuff. I will buy a DVD here or there, they aren't that expensive but downloads are free. I think I must have a criminal streak in me because I even burn copies of movies to give to my friends and family, take requests for stuff, etc. I used to buy a ton of music and movies until downloading came about, so piracy has saved me a lot of money. The best is getting to kick back and watch a movie at home that's still in the theatres, while paying nothing. I have absolutely no moral qualms with this whatsoever.
Wow...that is bold...considering Bush is considering signing legislation that will jail people who distribute copies of pre-release movies.

article



Like I give a ****....I doubt it'll pass, and if it does I'll just play the odds. How many people are downloading the same movies I am? Bush can suck my cock. Anyways, I'm moving back to Canada in a year. You can get put in jail for smoking pot also, and more people do that than download movies.



I wipe my ass with your feelings
Originally Posted by dankphishin
Like I give a ****....I doubt it'll pass, and if it does I'll just play the odds. How many people are downloading the same movies I am? Bush can suck my cock. Anyways, I'm moving back to Canada in a year. You can get put in jail for smoking pot also, and more people do that than download movies.
Do me a favor, and stay in Canada.
__________________
We're soldiers. Soldiers don't go to hell. It's war. Soldiers, they kill other soldiers. We're in a situation where everybody involved knows the stakes. And if you're gonna accept those stakes... You gotta do certain things. It's business, we're soldiers. We follow codes... Orders.



Cousin Avi's Avatar
You’ve been hax0red
Originally Posted by joshuafor
Yeah, but even still, you're still watching on a small screen and you may end up downloading something that isn't worth a crap, nor may it be what you even thought you were downloading.
Um you dont have to pay for anything, it isnt exactly hard labour downloading movies. Jesus ****ing political correct people. if you have the balance of seeing and buying other movies then i dont see the problem in downloading the odd one.



Arresting your development
Originally Posted by joshuafor
Wow...that is bold...considering Bush is considering signing legislation that will jail people who distribute copies of pre-release movies.

article
I truly care for the artist when it comes down to down loading. Though when I hear Bush or any other political dick head sticking their wee-wees in anything then it makes me sick. It was cool when the idea of doing so was a moral thought, respect to the people who made the *****. But now if good ol' Uncle Scam wants a piece of the pie by throwing jail and fine threats around then I'm all for the FREE world to down load their fnaughty wordcking arses off! I'm sure Bush baby has more important things to worry about than who's sucking off some copy protected nipples.
__________________
Our real discoveries come from chaos, from going to the place that looks wrong and stupid and foolish.
Embrace the chaos and sour adversity, for wise men say it is the wisest course.






In Soviet America, you sue MPAA!
The very same act signed by Bush that gives 3 years to the first person to distribute a film also makes it 100% legal for companies other than the copyright holder to edit out the content of a film or TV show as they see fit to meet their standards. So effectively they try to do something which helps the artist (which will be utterly ineffective because such jail time threats are not inhibiting factors, this won't stop anything) and at the same time they implement a new policy, much to the protest of Hollywood, which directly does hurt their artistic merit.

Yay for benefiting content distributors and not content producers or consumers!
__________________
Horror's Not Dead
Latest Movie Review(s): Too lazy to keep this up to date. New reviews every week.



The Adventure Starts Here!
I'm a writer so I'm on the side of the artist. The more people download stuff for free (books, movies, music), the more the costs for these things stay high. This is copyrighted artistic material. Just because you're in an industry where your ideas or thoughts or hard work aren't for sale and have to stand on their own merits doesn't mean you're entitled to free copies of stuff we work hard to produce for you.

Work hard and BUY things legitimately. If a craftsman made a gorgeous rocking chair, are you just allowed to steal it from him because, well, you bought all your OTHER furniture so just this one rocking chair won't matter?

It is intellectual property rights. Don't take money out of my pocket, please.



In Soviet America, you sue MPAA!
Originally Posted by Austruck
It is intellectual property rights. Don't take money out of my pocket, please.
I agree and I do go out of my way to buy movies even if I've downloaded them first because I feel the creator deserves the respect (even if I didn't actually like the movie a whole lot and normally wouldn't have bought it). Though admittedly the number not purchased far exceeds the number purchased, but this isn't an attempt to defend downloading intellectual property - I know it's not right.

I'm just curious since you are a content producer, let's say you write a novel and it get's published exactly as you wrote it and then some other company, completely independent of you or your publisher, comes along and edits out portions of your novel because they find them offensive and then proceeds to resale said edited novel without compensating you or the publisher?

Would you as the actual artist care? I know I would.



Arresting your development
I would care.



The Adventure Starts Here!
Actually, OG, your example is highly illegal in the publishing industry and would net the second editor/publisher a HUGE mountain of legal hassles and fines. If I write a book and contract with a publisher to print and market it (and it's never in the same form you wrote it, BTW, in case you were wondering -- it always gets edited), then we are under contract for the rights to that book. And NO other publisher can produce it in any form or snippets thereof, beyond "fair use" for reviews, etc.

I know authors who routinely scout their own names on the web and find websites that take portions of their published works and put them on the sites illegally. They then sic their publishers on these site owners in order to insist that the copyrighted material be taken off the site immediately.

The publishing industry has this right. And most people don't photocopy books for "free." It's cheaper and easier to buy the book itself. They do, though, think nothing of copying music or movies. To me, it is the same thing, the same copyright infringement. Someone's hard work doesn't automatically become public domain the instant it's out there. Just because it's words or music or images rather than, say, a rocking chair or car, doesn't mean it didn't entail hard work and effort and talent.

Well, I'm ranting. Sorry.

/off soapbox



The Adventure Starts Here!
What is wrong with the logic of this statement?

"Well, there are six billion people on the planet. I only killed this ONE person, so statistically it's okay. Where's the harm?"

Either it's wrong or it's not. The sheer amount has nothing to do with it, IMHO.



The Adventure Starts Here!
Oh, I will add this on to my answer to your scenario, Og. Many publishers and agents will sign contracts that INCLUDE things like movie rights and *adaptation* rights. Unfortunately, a novelist whose work hits the big screen REALLY gets dumped on and has VERY little input into how his or her book is adapted for the screen. They almost NEVER let the novelist do that work, and if they take it and chop it to bits and pieces, there is nothing the author can do about it.

And, I assume that all movie contracts (those created solely for the screen and adaptations of other works) including AGREEMENTS by all parties for editing content for television broadcast at some point down the line. That's just the nature of the business, which is not solely about artistic content but also about money. Ultimately, even those of us who try to come off as "artistic" are really as much about putting food on the table as we are about artistic integrity.

I've written a few novels now (still looking for an agent at the moment), and every author I know who has an agent and/or publisher already has to sacrifice some of their original vision of their work when that agent or editor asks them to change entire scenes and sections of the work in order to make it more saleable. Don't be fooled into thinking the artist/author is brooding over his or her original work. If you're that concerned about every jot and tittle you've written and won't let anyone touch it, you will not succeed as a published author. Word will get out and no publisher will want to work with you.

You should see what a manuscript looks like after an editor (or copyeditor, like me) has gotten through with it!

So, every form of artistic expression has that problem, not just movies formatted for television.

If you want to make films solely for yourself (or write books or produce sculpture), then you can do what you want. But once you decide you want to sell it, you may have to learn how to adapt. It's just how the world works.



In Soviet America, you sue MPAA!
Welp, it would appear applying the same logic of the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act to novels was a bit of a stretch and while I understand entirely where you're coming from (and I acknowledge my analogy doesn't transfer), I didn't explain my point about the editing as I should have.

I'm not talking about editing and formatting films for television, this is beyond that. An excerpt from a Wired article about it:

"We're thrilled that it passed," said Bill Aho, CEO of ClearPlay, a company that sells software enabling parents to skip over the sex and violence in Hollywood DVDs. "I think it's a great bill for families. I think it's great for parents and I think it's great for the technology sector."

People should be allowed to use technology to watch movies "their way" in their own home, he said.

ClearPlay and other similar services were sued by the movie studios, the Director's Guild of America and 13 individual directors for copyright violations and for altering their work. The technology companies filed a motion for summary judgment and were awaiting a ruling in the 10th District Court in Colorado.

The technology company plans to introduce two new DVD machines with filtering capabilities this summer. Aho said that ClearPlay looks forward to integrating its technology into more devices.
Here is a legalized, profitable technology that results in an alteration of copyrighted material without the consent or compensation of the copyright holder.

Questioning whether or not an artist would feel their art had been molested was a stretch, but I find it rather hipocritical that they condem one technology that breaks copyright and heartily endorse another.



Did you guys watch that thing on AMC yesterday? "Bleep! The Censoring of Hollywood" (or something like that), it was really interesting to watch guys like Steven Soderbergh personally challenge these companies. He stepped up and basically said, "Look, we understand you want cleansed versions of these films but let us the film makers do it the right way." I thought that was cool of him.

Very interesting little show.
__________________
Make it happen!




And this is my BOOMstick!
I don't care about movie industries not getting enough money, $13 for a movie ticket is outrageous.



Wanna Date? Got Any Money?
I have to agree, especially because in Calgary there are very rarely any cheap alternatives. $13 plus popcorn and beverage is more then you should ever pay to see a film. I'd rather buy a $3 box of popcorn, a $4 case of pop and rent a movie for $4 and be able to do it all in the comfort of my home.
__________________
Buy a bag, go home in a box.



And this is my BOOMstick!
Originally Posted by Electric Wizard
I have to agree, especially because in Calgary there are very rarely any cheap alternatives. $13 plus popcorn and beverage is more then you should ever pay to see a film. I'd rather buy a $3 box of popcorn, a $4 case of pop and rent a movie for $4 and be able to do it all in the comfort of my home.
Yup in Calgary, just 3 days ago when I went to see H2G2, it cost me $13 for the ticket, $12 for a large popcorn, medium drink combo, and another 4 bucks for a pack of smarties. WTF!



Originally Posted by Austruck

Work hard and BUY things legitimately. If a craftsman made a gorgeous rocking chair, are you just allowed to steal it from him because, well, you bought all your OTHER furniture so just this one rocking chair won't matter?
If I bought this chair off of this craftsman and with advanced technology, duplicated it to give to my friends, then i'm sorry but that isn't stealing. The physical properties of this chair is now mine and i can do as i like with it. Your example is unfair as it is implying actually removing the chair from the property of the craftsman in the first place without his consent. If the craftsman doesn't want his ideas to be taken, then he can't have it available to buy. I'm totally against somebody copying a movie of which they didn't buy, from a theatre then making copies and giving it away to millions on the net as it isn't his in the first place to give away. But when it comes to buying a dvd, then copying it, i can't call it stealing. But an artist or a filmaker has the right to come up with disks that cannot be copied as long as it's theirs and i'm actually hoping one day they will have something available to prevent it from being duplicated. I really do.

Actually, one time somebody gave me a copy of Spiderman 2 before it hit theatres, and i promised myself if i were to watch it, i would go see it at the cinema and buy the dvd when it came out to ease my conscience. And i did hold to my own agreement.