|
'Zombieland' director speaks of piracy, gets angry via Twitter
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 21 November, 2009
Earlier this week, the writer and director of the popular movie Zombieland, Rhett Reese, lashed out at pirates of his movie, saying it may lead to a sequel not being shot. He even personally attacked a few Twitter members which had posted about downloading and watching the film from their homes.
Zombieland is available as an R5, and was one of the most popular films via P2P of the last three weeks.
... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
Amak
Member
|
22. November 2009 @ 00:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
"Copyright law grants the owner of a copyright a window of time within which he/she can make money off the copyright"
The problem is how long it lasts! Why does it have to be 70+ years? Why not something reasonable like 5 or 10?
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
amf0802
Junior Member
|
22. November 2009 @ 00:35 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Amak:
The problem is how long it lasts! Why does it have to be 70+ years? Why not something reasonable like 5 or 10?
I'm a classical musician for a living and the 70 year copyright is perfect for my business. The 'standards' for my profession and what most consider the masters and most popular for performance are over 200 years old. So in this case 70 years isn't even nearly enough. The same can be said for movies. Why shouldn't a film director be able to create a masterpiece and then sit back and retire on his earnings. A shorter copyright wouldn't allow this.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. November 2009 @ 00:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
"Copyright law grants the owner of a copyright a window of time within which he/she can make money off the copyright"
Key word make money, go after everyone whose trying to make a dime off it and leave the rest of us ALONE.
This is something people in the industry do not comprehend, they that that because something is made it can be automatically protected under some obscure absolutionisim that grants them the right to trample any one any where because they own something.
Tough sht, in most places you are given the right to exclusive profit and little else, some more as time goes on what to make it harder and harder for people to share,lend and distribute which is pointless because you can't stop it the more you try and invent schemes to protect the industry right to rent down to the masses the more the people will fight back by not buying and shearing all they can.
Its simple focus on profit it creates a much healthier and vibrant industry when the people are allowed to make fan projects freely and and be true fans trying to get the word and message and copes out so that people will support whatever it is they like instead of flogging the people for daring to think and question...
|
|
Hopium
Member
|
22. November 2009 @ 01:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
"The movie has done very well." he said it himself, he just wants golden valve stems on his ferrari
|
|
jony218
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. November 2009 @ 01:57 |
Link to this message
|
All these pirated movie releases to the public (especially the dvd quality ones) are inside jobs. The pirates work within the movie industry. Many people nowadays don't go to the movie theatres anymore. They wait for the dvd to come out so they can rent it, but some want instant satisfaction because of the "me ,I want it now society". Instant of waiting 3 months to release a movie on dvd, it would be more profitable for the studios to release them 1 month after there release. This would "checkmate" the pirates and satisfy the "i want it now" generation.
|
Senior Member
|
22. November 2009 @ 02:04 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by amf0802:
I'm a classical musician for a living and the 70 year copyright is perfect for my business. The 'standards' for my profession and what most consider the masters and most popular for performance are over 200 years old. So in this case 70 years isn't even nearly enough.
What exactly are you going to use all that income for if you aren't alive to collect it? Most people these days do not live 200 years. (Actually there have been several who didn't even make it to 150.)
Quote:
Why shouldn't a film director be able to create a masterpiece and then sit back and retire on his earnings. A shorter copyright wouldn't allow this.
Honestly, I don't think he should. A few years work is not worth a lifetime of income, IMHO. But my opinion completely aside, shorter copyright needn't impede even this. The money made off of one big movie just in the box office alone is enough to sustain a small town's population indefinitely off interest.
|
|
John_Donn
Member
|
22. November 2009 @ 02:36 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by amf0802:
I'm a classical musician for a living and the 70 year copyright is perfect for my business. The 'standards' for my profession and what most consider the masters and most popular for performance are over 200 years old. So in this case 70 years isn't even nearly enough.
What exactly are you going to use all that income for if you aren't alive to collect it? Most people these days do not live 200 years. (Actually there have been several who didn't even make it to 150.)
Quote:
Why shouldn't a film director be able to create a masterpiece and then sit back and retire on his earnings. A shorter copyright wouldn't allow this.
Honestly, I don't think he should. A few years work is not worth a lifetime of income, IMHO. But my opinion completely aside, shorter copyright needn't impede even this. The money made off of one big movie just in the box office alone is enough to sustain a small town's population indefinitely off interest.
I agree even making 1 million dollars of profit for one movie is a redic amount and he made a lot more than that i bet.....do 3 movies and you can retire with ease with solid investing
|
|
beanos66
Member
|
22. November 2009 @ 04:23 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
No, I don?t subscribe to the Robin Hood argument, which claims that rich, greedy Hollywood studios/actors/writers/etc. have enough $ and don?t need more.
Just Like drug dealers and pimps never have enough $ and don't need anymore
|
|
jack0001
Suspended permanently
|
22. November 2009 @ 09:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
SPAM removed
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. November 2009 @ 09:21
|
|
mikecUSA
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. November 2009 @ 09:17 |
Link to this message
|
All the proud pirates, u nrepentant as they are, are foolish and short sighted. Ignorant too. If you want to watch a movie, go see it in the theatre "first run" or rent it on DVD, or stream it from Netflix or something. As long as where you got it involved some legal financial trasaction, I'm okay with it. If you buy it though you should be able to make a back-up copy. if you rent it you should also be able to make a copy for yourself I think to time shift your viewing when you have time. This financial transaction funds the industry that provides the entertainment VALUE.
Staight piracy? bad deal, ultimately for everyone. Including pirates.
If you don't think straight pirating can't possibly put a stop to Zombieland 2 you are an IDIOT.
I loved Zombieland and hope for a Zombieland 2, and a 2013, and Dupicity2 and hundreds of more movies that haven't even been thought of yet.
Outright piracy will kill many projects.
It's sad that the logic/moral/selfish paradign does not include a hint of "fair play", but lots of lip service to "fair use".
Outright pirates that don't pay for anything and brag are not just stealing form the record/movie/game producing entities (artist,writes, camera operators and directors etc) but they are stealing from consumers too, and ultimately from the priates themselves. That's why they are so rediculously STUPID! I can't believe they brag about what they do so u repentently. L O S E R S.
They are who ruined things for true "Fair use" people.
It why DMCA was thought to be neccessary in the first place. Frickin insane JUVENILE self centeredness.
I do not work in the motion picture or music production industry at all. I'm a mobile disc-jockey who's spend a couple million dollars on music over the past 25 years from which I earn my way through life.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. November 2009 @ 10:37 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by mikecUSA:
All the proud pirates, u nrepentant as they are, are foolish and short sighted. Ignorant too. If you want to watch a movie, go see it in the theatre "first run" or rent it on DVD, or stream it from Netflix or something. As long as where you got it involved some legal financial trasaction, I'm okay with it. If you buy it though you should be able to make a back-up copy. if you rent it you should also be able to make a copy for yourself I think to time shift your viewing when you have time. This financial transaction funds the industry that provides the entertainment VALUE.
Staight piracy? bad deal, ultimately for everyone. Including pirates.
If you don't think straight pirating can't possibly put a stop to Zombieland 2 you are an IDIOT.
I loved Zombieland and hope for a Zombieland 2, and a 2013, and Dupicity2 and hundreds of more movies that haven't even been thought of yet.
Outright piracy will kill many projects.
It's sad that the logic/moral/selfish paradign does not include a hint of "fair play", but lots of lip service to "fair use".
Outright pirates that don't pay for anything and brag are not just stealing form the record/movie/game producing entities (artist,writes, camera operators and directors etc) but they are stealing from consumers too, and ultimately from the priates themselves. That's why they are so rediculously STUPID! I can't believe they brag about what they do so u repentently. L O S E R S.
They are who ruined things for true "Fair use" people.
It why DMCA was thought to be neccessary in the first place. Frickin insane JUVENILE self centeredness.
I do not work in the motion picture or music production industry at all. I'm a mobile disc-jockey who's spend a couple million dollars on music over the past 25 years from which I earn my way through life.
Wow...... and you seem to not only over estimate the effects of piracy but think they matter at all...... you decry the little guy but its just a strawman argument the little guy has already been paid and only a few people get royalties so at the end of the day whos making the most money and changing the rules so they get more money, heres a hint its not anyone who works for a living.
Piracy is a natural part of media due to reasons of popularity,price and availability. And you can't really call the majority of pirates these days "pirates" because they have no interest in making money off the item in question, and that is the separation point the industry should focus on instead of trying to bully and monopolize how the system works to fatten the bottom line. I have said it many times go after those that sell stuff without a license and those who making directly through donations and ad revenue. Hell hell we could see some true innovation if they did that, fan sites could not be touched in terms of take down notices and C&D's NUT the industry could welcome them give them for free or at great discount stuff to sell so they can keep their project going.
|
|
Bigtx99
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. November 2009 @ 11:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
To be honest, everyone posting here, for and against piracy are using strawman arguments.
It is wrong to pirate a movie and watch it, no question about it. Yet, it happens. Everyone does stuff they know is wrong, yet still do it. Smoking, drinking, drugs etc. All bad, yet it is done, can't really help it.
If you do it, you do it, just don't sit there and say "i'm not doing anything wrong, its ok to pirate stuff."
|
|
mikecUSA
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. November 2009 @ 12:02 |
Link to this message
|
Waelth for an individual is not calculated by how much is spent but by how much you retain. Of course "wealth" is a relative term, but by not spending $10 on a CD or $12 on a movie, you save that money hence helped retain ones own wealth and hence help yourself build wealth.
One could argue that those fellas comandeering ships and plundering them they got welath by stealing, and the East India trading company also got a little wealthier by the insurance they may have taken out on their property and goods.
The point is, wealth is a matter of not just goods in possesion, but also money NOT SPENT.
In the mix of your daily pirates life. He retains control of his funds and the $50 he did not spend on CD's he probably might have purchased (based on annecdotal history of the average music buyer in the 70's & 80's) ro the $60 he may have spent either going to the movies or buying a few Betamax of Star Wars or Indiana Jones in the 80's I thinnk it's safe to view pirates of today even the ones who do not make new money off their piracy as bonafide financial beneficiaries of their actions.
The music and movie industries are both in trouble because of this activity, not for lack of decent product that the public will consume. It's the consuming it for free part that is killing the goose that lays the creative egg.
|
Moderator
|
22. November 2009 @ 12:08 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by mikecUSA:
The music and movie industries are both in trouble because of this activity, not for lack of decent product that the public will consume. It's the consuming it for free part that is killing the goose that lays the creative egg.
No, they're in trouble for other reasons, inability to keep up with modern technology, ridiculous taxes i mean royalties (i refer to a recent news article where a shop assistant got into trouble for singing, for example), etc etc, but the notion that they are in trouble due to any form of piracy is just that, a notion.
I'm one of those who doesn't like 'added value' on DVD's, ie trailers and adverts, one of the reasons i am not interested in Bluray is that i don't want to buy a 50GB (or whatever size they are) movie disc only to have umpteen gigabytes of fluff. If i could buy a movie that only contained the movie, i'd buy it. That's not me advocating piracy, i just don't want unnecessary crap on my discs, just an example of the industry not providing what i want from a purchase.
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules ***This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. November 2009 @ 12:19
|
|
Spaz02538
Newbie
|
22. November 2009 @ 12:25 |
Link to this message
|
who would want to see a zombieland 2 anyway? The movie was stupid, it was like an 80's comedy that just wasn't up to par for the year 2009 almost 2010.
This is why people are not going to the movie theater as much anymore, because people can't rely on a good movie being made anymore.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. November 2009 @ 12:31 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by mikecUSA:
Waelth for an individual is not calculated by how much is spent but by how much you retain. Of course "wealth" is a relative term, but by not spending $10 on a CD or $12 on a movie, you save that money hence helped retain ones own wealth and hence help yourself build wealth.
One could argue that those fellas comandeering ships and plundering them they got welath by stealing, and the East India trading company also got a little wealthier by the insurance they may have taken out on their property and goods.
The point is, wealth is a matter of not just goods in possesion, but also money NOT SPENT.
In the mix of your daily pirates life. He retains control of his funds and the $50 he did not spend on CD's he probably might have purchased (based on annecdotal history of the average music buyer in the 70's & 80's) ro the $60 he may have spent either going to the movies or buying a few Betamax of Star Wars or Indiana Jones in the 80's I thinnk it's safe to view pirates of today even the ones who do not make new money off their piracy as bonafide financial beneficiaries of their actions.
The music and movie industries are both in trouble because of this activity, not for lack of decent product that the public will consume. It's the consuming it for free part that is killing the goose that lays the creative egg.
....that would be true IF the majority did not buy things, but because they still but things from media to goods sponsored by media it is irreverent that things are being consumed for free, as I have said before if they would focused on those who are aiming illicit profit(direct sale,ad rev and donations) the majority of media distribution would be legit leaving only those who want to share and trade stuff further to the fringes.
You think the forest is made out of the industry its not and never was its made out of consumers(paying or not) and the industry always has to find a new way to sale stuff to the consumer if this means competing with free stuff then so be it because frankly media can not be worse than it is now...
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. November 2009 @ 12:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
Moderator
|
22. November 2009 @ 12:37 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Creaky
hey Creaky kaspersky is giving me virus warning over one of the ads here
11/20/2009 5:58:45 PM Detected: HEUR:Trojan.Script.Iframer http://search.extreme-sportsonline.com/g...cUTRm4lDs3.html Firefox
I use AVG Zippy, what i do know is that link is loading hundreds of links within the browser (ie all you see at the bottom left of firefox is 'transferring data from <hundreds of links>' before the page is even loaded). In fact the page doesn't finish loading for me, i canned it after a couple minutes of not finishing loading..
Main PC ~ Intel C2Q Q6600 (G0 Stepping)/Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS3/2GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500/Zalman CNPS9700/Antec 900/Corsair HX 620W
Network ~ DD-WRT ~ 2node WDS-WPA2/AES ~ Buffalo WHR-G54S. 3node WPA2/AES ~ WRT54GS v6 (inc. WEP BSSID), WRT54G v2, WRT54G2 v1. *** Forum Rules ***
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. November 2009 @ 12:39
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. November 2009 @ 13:15 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Creaky
hey Creaky kaspersky is giving me virus warning over one of the ads here
11/20/2009 5:58:45 PM Detected: HEUR:Trojan.Script.Iframer http://search.extreme-sportsonline.com/g...cUTRm4lDs3.html Firefox
I use AVG Zippy, what i do know is that link is loading hundreds of links within the browser (ie all you see at the bottom left of firefox is 'transferring data from <hundreds of links>' before the page is even loaded). In fact the page doesn't finish loading for me, i canned it after a couple minutes of not finishing loading..
Ok just thought I'd tell someone.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
22. November 2009 @ 13:50 |
Link to this message
|
Seems to me this is just the typical confused rubbish and greed-speak that's typical of so many so-called artists these days.
Of course they're not really artists (otherwise they'd be happy to see their art spread as far and widely as possible).
The notion that every viewing of or listening to of music or movie can be monetized is as unworkable as it is laughable.
'Piracy' in terms of producing illegal copies for sale is a crime, I've no problem with that one and I support the fact that we have various law enforcement bodies for that.
'Sharing' in terms of a private individual downloading for his own personal non-commercial use is in fact not a crime, it's merely a copyright infringement.
Not only do the studies show that most who share are most likely to buy the retail version (in which case what on earth is he grumbling about?) but we also tend to have the satellite TV services, game console movie downloading services etc etc.
We pay. Handsomely.
Personally I like to try before buy.
Make the film attractive enough and I'll even spring for the Blu-ray.
Offer me the usual childish brain-dead cr@p and you'll not see a sale.
.....but don't worry Rhett Reese my TV license and satellite TV subscription (all channels inc HD) is a plenty large enough contribution to 'the industry'.
I even pay for films I will never watch on satellite TV and music I will never listen to.
Works both ways.
Dry your eyes, quit your stupid nonsense & get a sense of honest perspective & decency.
As if you aren't staggeringly rich enough
(compared to most of your fellow man on this planet)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. November 2009 @ 13:53
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. November 2009 @ 14:03 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
Seems to me this is just the typical confused rubbish and greed-speak that's typical of so many so-called artists these days.
Of course they're not really artists (otherwise they'd be happy to see their art spread as far and widely as possible).
The notion that every viewing of or listening to of music or movie can be monetized is as unworkable as it is laughable.
'Piracy' in terms of producing illegal copies for sale is a crime, I've no problem with that one and I support the fact that we have various law enforcement bodies for that.
'Sharing' in terms of a private individual downloading for his own personal non-commercial use is in fact not a crime, it's merely a copyright infringement.
Not only do the studies show that most who share are most likely to buy the retail version (in which case what on earth is he grumbling about?) but we also tend to have the satellite TV services, game console movie downloading services etc etc.
We pay. Handsomely.
Personally I like to try before buy.
Make the film attractive enough and I'll even spring for the Blu-ray.
Offer me the usual childish brain-dead cr@p and you'll not see a sale.
.....but don't worry Rhett Reese my TV license and satellite TV subscription (all channels inc HD) is a plenty large enough contribution to 'the industry'.
I even pay for films I will never watch on satellite TV and music I will never listen to.
Works both ways.
Dry your eyes, quit your stupid nonsense & get a sense of honest perspective & decency.
As if you aren't staggeringly rich enough
(compared to most of your fellow man on this planet)
Being a consumer we consumer constantly and thus are paying constantly because some of what we consumer is free dose not make what we put into the industry invalid. We are able to put money into the the parts of the industry we like and respect while hoping the other parts shrivel off and die no matter how unrealistic and unlikely that will be because the media industry as a whole is very powerful and immune to what millions of people do or say, now when billions act up they stop and listen but a few million freebies is only part of billions and billions of active and legitimate consumership.
|
|
bomber991
Member
|
22. November 2009 @ 14:51 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Amak:
"Copyright law grants the owner of a copyright a window of time within which he/she can make money off the copyright"
The problem is how long it lasts! Why does it have to be 70+ years? Why not something reasonable like 5 or 10?
Looking at it now, I wonder if something like the DVD and BluRay release of 80s classics would have ever happened if the copyright was only for 10 years. I mean I'm sure there'd be companies that put it onto those formats, but those companies wouldn't have access to the original master copy of the film to do that.
Anyways, piracy vs retail movie theater experience. Right now piracy offers a better experience and it has more to do with than just price. I can stay at home and watch the movie. I don't have to sit in any sticky chairs and sneak in my food. I don't have to worry about the picture being out of focus. I have control over the volume level. I don't have to worry about people talking during the movie. But the thing I love most about piracy vs going to the movies, I can watch the god dang movie whenever I want. Gotta go take a wee? Just press pause. Want to watch half the movie now, and the other half later? NO PROBLEM!
Now the piracy vs owning or renting a dvd doesn't hold up as well. However right now I've only got a standard definition tv and dvd player. One quick advantage of piracy is that the movie is released in dvd quality sometimes months before the film is released on dvd in the retail market. Thanks to piracy I'm able to download and watch a 720p or 1080p movie on my computer. I got a 21in widescreen so pulling up a chair infront of the pc works fine. Otherwise the only other advantage I can think of is that I don't have to physically store the dvd's for years at a time between views. I'm the type of movie watcher where I watch a movie once and then don't watch it again for at least a few years.
Renting works better for me, and again the only advantages with piracy is that I don't have to drive to a store, and that problem is eliminated with netflix. Even then, I live in an apartment complex and it's a good 5 minute round trip walking to and from the mail box. I had netflix before and they do get those movie out to you pretty quick, but sometimes you expect the movie in your mailbox and it isn't that. That sucks and that's something that doesn't happen with piracy. Netflix didn't have the streaming when I was a member with them, but I know the quality of those streams still won't be able to match 720p or 1080p quality. That doesn't mean they aren't ok to watch though.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. November 2009 @ 18:17 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Amak:
"Copyright law grants the owner of a copyright a window of time within which he/she can make money off the copyright"
The problem is how long it lasts! Why does it have to be 70+ years? Why not something reasonable like 5 or 10?
Looking at it now, I wonder if something like the DVD and BluRay release of 80s classics would have ever happened if the copyright was only for 10 years. I mean I'm sure there'd be companies that put it onto those formats, but those companies wouldn't have access to the original master copy of the film to do that.
Anyways, piracy vs retail movie theater experience. Right now piracy offers a better experience and it has more to do with than just price. I can stay at home and watch the movie. I don't have to sit in any sticky chairs and sneak in my food. I don't have to worry about the picture being out of focus. I have control over the volume level. I don't have to worry about people talking during the movie. But the thing I love most about piracy vs going to the movies, I can watch the god dang movie whenever I want. Gotta go take a wee? Just press pause. Want to watch half the movie now, and the other half later? NO PROBLEM!
Now the piracy vs owning or renting a dvd doesn't hold up as well. However right now I've only got a standard definition tv and dvd player. One quick advantage of piracy is that the movie is released in dvd quality sometimes months before the film is released on dvd in the retail market. Thanks to piracy I'm able to download and watch a 720p or 1080p movie on my computer. I got a 21in widescreen so pulling up a chair infront of the pc works fine. Otherwise the only other advantage I can think of is that I don't have to physically store the dvd's for years at a time between views. I'm the type of movie watcher where I watch a movie once and then don't watch it again for at least a few years.
Renting works better for me, and again the only advantages with piracy is that I don't have to drive to a store, and that problem is eliminated with netflix. Even then, I live in an apartment complex and it's a good 5 minute round trip walking to and from the mail box. I had netflix before and they do get those movie out to you pretty quick, but sometimes you expect the movie in your mailbox and it isn't that. That sucks and that's something that doesn't happen with piracy. Netflix didn't have the streaming when I was a member with them, but I know the quality of those streams still won't be able to match 720p or 1080p quality. That doesn't mean they aren't ok to watch though.
If its profitable a company would go to any lengths to buy the masters and re release it if not its a free for all where the competition leads to great deals and ingenious qaulity. Its win win for everyone.
|
|
tefarko
Junior Member
|
22. November 2009 @ 18:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
give me a "full satisfaction or your money back" guarantee and I'll stop downloading movies and go straight to the theater... I am tired of wasting my hard earned money on crappy movies, deemed blockbusters by the sold out critics...
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Amak
Member
|
22. November 2009 @ 20:25 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by mikecUSA:
All the proud pirates, u nrepentant as they are, are foolish and short sighted. Ignorant too. If you want to watch a movie, go see it in the theatre "first run" or rent it on DVD, or stream it from Netflix or something. As long as where you got it involved some legal financial trasaction, I'm okay with it. If you buy it though you should be able to make a back-up copy. if you rent it you should also be able to make a copy for yourself I think to time shift your viewing when you have time. This financial transaction funds the industry that provides the entertainment VALUE.
Staight piracy? bad deal, ultimately for everyone. Including pirates.
If you don't think straight pirating can't possibly put a stop to Zombieland 2 you are an IDIOT.
I loved Zombieland and hope for a Zombieland 2, and a 2013, and Dupicity2 and hundreds of more movies that haven't even been thought of yet.
Outright piracy will kill many projects.
It's sad that the logic/moral/selfish paradign does not include a hint of "fair play", but lots of lip service to "fair use".
Outright pirates that don't pay for anything and brag are not just stealing form the record/movie/game producing entities (artist,writes, camera operators and directors etc) but they are stealing from consumers too, and ultimately from the priates themselves. That's why they are so rediculously STUPID! I can't believe they brag about what they do so u repentently. L O S E R S.
They are who ruined things for true "Fair use" people.
It why DMCA was thought to be neccessary in the first place. Frickin insane JUVENILE self centeredness.
I do not work in the motion picture or music production industry at all. I'm a mobile disc-jockey who's spend a couple million dollars on music over the past 25 years from which I earn my way through life.
You would be right....if you weren't dead wrong.
|
