|
|
|
New Cinavia DRM takes aim at pirates
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 3 March, 2010
FileShareFreak has a very interesting report out today about Cinavia DRM, which is a new audio watermarking technology that takes aim at pirates, and those trying to playback movie downloads via their PlayStation 3s.
The site says the watermarking works by "comparing the source of the audio to the format in which a movie was released (ie theatrical or commercial disc), and if the watermarked ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
Member
|
5. January 2012 @ 19:22 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by donthetech:
Look, I did not accuse you of stealing, just read what is in bold type...THAT is what I was commenting on....If you bought the disc, then no biggie.....
and just what is wrong with sharing? i bought the movie. should i not be allowed to share it?
i could copy the parts for a Ferrari and build my own, it still doesn't make it stealing...
darkflux
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 5. January 2012 @ 19:26
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
tinner45
Member
|
6. January 2012 @ 00:42 |
Link to this message
|
DARKFLUX have you tried BD-RB yet? BD-RB does take care of the Cinavia. You keep saying that no program will put BD on a DVD and plaly on PS3 and you never have said if you used BD-RB yet. Sure it takes time to shrink to a DVD but you'll have a great movie.
|
|
donthetech
Newbie
|
6. January 2012 @ 11:40 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by darkflux:
Originally posted by donthetech:
Look, I did not accuse you of stealing, just read what is in bold type...THAT is what I was commenting on....If you bought the disc, then no biggie.....
and just what is wrong with sharing? i bought the movie. should i not be allowed to share it?
i could copy the parts for a Ferrari and build my own, it still doesn't make it stealing...
Granted, but I'm willing to bet you will need licensing from Ferrari to copy those parts in order for it to be legal, inj which case you bought the licensing so it's ok to make the part.....You can't tell me that THIS part of your post doesn't condone stealing. "remember, most downloaders only download because they can't AFFORD to rent them (or buy them for that matter, especially with the economy like it is). some of us may be able to afford to buy BR discs in bulk, but those of us living on a dollar a day (or less) due to bills can barely afford BLANK DVDs, let alone ones with content written on them!" You mean to tell me someone can't trot down to the ol' Redbox kiosk and pay 1.50 or whatever it is now and rent a movie? C'mon! Again, if you bought the movie, you paid for it, so if you want to share something you paid for for free, more power to you....I don't mean having people over to watch the film, I mean giving a film you bought to someone else to copy....I know about the Doctrine of First Sale, but giving a new release DVD or Blu-ray to a friend or relative TO COPY it is a non-starter for me......
|
Member
|
7. January 2012 @ 00:28 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by tinner45:
DARKFLUX have you tried BD-RB yet? BD-RB does take care of the Cinavia. You keep saying that no program will put BD on a DVD and plaly on PS3 and you never have said if you used BD-RB yet. Sure it takes time to shrink to a DVD but you'll have a great movie.
i don't HAVE a BR burner, just a DVD-RW drive. but i've already TOLD you that i KNOW you can copy BluRays that are not affected by Cinavia! but the Cinavia is STILL on them! PS3 just doesn't STOP them from working, since they have the copy protection on them.
so even copying them to DVD AFTER this is done is pointless, since you will still need to contend with the Cinavi@ BS...
AGAIN, copying to a BD-RB does NOT REMOVE Cinav!a! it merely keeps it from popping up with the warnings...
darkflux
|
Member
|
7. January 2012 @ 00:36 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by donthetech:
Originally posted by darkflux:
Originally posted by donthetech:
Look, I did not accuse you of stealing, just read what is in bold type...THAT is what I was commenting on....If you bought the disc, then no biggie.....
and just what is wrong with sharing? i bought the movie. should i not be allowed to share it?
i could copy the parts for a Ferrari and build my own, it still doesn't make it stealing...
Granted, but I'm willing to bet you will need licensing from Ferrari to copy those parts in order for it to be legal, inj which case you bought the licensing so it's ok to make the part.....You can't tell me that THIS part of your post doesn't condone stealing. "remember, most downloaders only download because they can't AFFORD to rent them (or buy them for that matter, especially with the economy like it is). some of us may be able to afford to buy BR discs in bulk, but those of us living on a dollar a day (or less) due to bills can barely afford BLANK DVDs, let alone ones with content written on them!" You mean to tell me someone can't trot down to the ol' Redbox kiosk and pay 1.50 or whatever it is now and rent a movie? C'mon! Again, if you bought the movie, you paid for it, so if you want to share something you paid for for free, more power to you....I don't mean having people over to watch the film, I mean giving a film you bought to someone else to copy....I know about the Doctrine of First Sale, but giving a new release DVD or Blu-ray to a friend or relative TO COPY it is a non-starter for me......
okay, one: you only need a license to copy a part if it is
a. an exact duplicate, and
b. you are planning on selling it, or selling it as a Ferrari, at the very least. you know how many cars have IDENTICAL insides, but the outside looks different, and so they are able to sell them as "different" cars?!? check some Haynes manuals out, and then get back to me, as i have YET to see anyone SELLING or MAKING MONEY from copying DVDs. typically, it is the opposite...
and two: i know MANY people who CAN rent RedBox movies, and some DO! then they get them home and copy them, so that they can share the "wealth" with their family and friends, who may be jobless, or on just enough welfare for food. why should the innocent suffer while around the corner or down the block, somebody is laughing and gleeful, watching whatever horrible Adam Sandler movie they've cooked up this month?
darkflux
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 7. January 2012 @ 00:37
|
Newbie
|
7. January 2012 @ 10:18 |
Link to this message
|
I just wanted to inform you that regular DVDs rented from Redbox, BlockbusterExpress, or Netflix, NOT BR discs, some have Cinavia on them. So using DVDFab to copy a non-BR disc will prevent the PS3 from playing a copy of a non-BR disc on a PS3 also. My point is Cinavia is not only on BlueRay discs, but on regular DVDs as well.
Sig: The mark of an expert isnt that he knows everything;
Its that he knows where to look everything up!
|
Member
|
7. January 2012 @ 13:35 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by klonk:
I just wanted to inform you that regular DVDs rented from Redbox, BlockbusterExpress, or Netflix, NOT BR discs, some have Cinavia on them. So using DVDFab to copy a non-BR disc will prevent the PS3 from playing a copy of a non-BR disc on a PS3 also. My point is Cinavia is not only on BlueRay discs, but on regular DVDs as well.
it's begun...
|
Newbie
|
8. January 2012 @ 12:05 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by darkflux:
Originally posted by klonk:
I just wanted to inform you that regular DVDs rented from Redbox, BlockbusterExpress, or Netflix, NOT BR discs, some have Cinavia on them. So using DVDFab to copy a non-BR disc will prevent the PS3 from playing a copy of a non-BR disc on a PS3 also. My point is Cinavia is not only on BlueRay discs, but on regular DVDs as well.
it's begun...
I originally posted this on 04/02/2011 (post #81). At least with regular DVDs, you can play them on a non-Blue Ray player. You don't have that option with a Blue Ray player or a PS3.
Sig: The mark of an expert isnt that he knows everything;
Its that he knows where to look everything up!
|
|
donthetech
Newbie
|
8. January 2012 @ 14:20 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by darkflux:
Originally posted by donthetech:
Originally posted by darkflux:
Originally posted by donthetech:
Look, I did not accuse you of stealing, just read what is in bold type...THAT is what I was commenting on....If you bought the disc, then no biggie.....
and just what is wrong with sharing? i bought the movie. should i not be allowed to share it?
i could copy the parts for a Ferrari and build my own, it still doesn't make it stealing...
Granted, but I'm willing to bet you will need licensing from Ferrari to copy those parts in order for it to be legal, inj which case you bought the licensing so it's ok to make the part.....You can't tell me that THIS part of your post doesn't condone stealing. "remember, most downloaders only download because they can't AFFORD to rent them (or buy them for that matter, especially with the economy like it is). some of us may be able to afford to buy BR discs in bulk, but those of us living on a dollar a day (or less) due to bills can barely afford BLANK DVDs, let alone ones with content written on them!" You mean to tell me someone can't trot down to the ol' Redbox kiosk and pay 1.50 or whatever it is now and rent a movie? C'mon! Again, if you bought the movie, you paid for it, so if you want to share something you paid for for free, more power to you....I don't mean having people over to watch the film, I mean giving a film you bought to someone else to copy....I know about the Doctrine of First Sale, but giving a new release DVD or Blu-ray to a friend or relative TO COPY it is a non-starter for me......
okay, one: you only need a license to copy a part if it is
a. an exact duplicate, and
b. you are planning on selling it, or selling it as a Ferrari, at the very least. you know how many cars have IDENTICAL insides, but the outside looks different, and so they are able to sell them as "different" cars?!? check some Haynes manuals out, and then get back to me, as i have YET to see anyone SELLING or MAKING MONEY from copying DVDs. typically, it is the opposite...
and two: i know MANY people who CAN rent RedBox movies, and some DO! then they get them home and copy them, so that they can share the "wealth" with their family and friends, who may be jobless, or on just enough welfare for food. why should the innocent suffer while around the corner or down the block, somebody is laughing and gleeful, watching whatever horrible Adam Sandler movie they've cooked up this month?
Ok, To your first point, I am not going to digress away from the main issue of piracy....As for people who try to sell copied rental DVD's, I knew a number of them and blew in each one to the authorities as I do not condone the practice....
To your second point, are you kidding me? This is the very reason a DRM like Cinavia exists in the first place...So it's ok for someone to RENT a movie, copy it and give it away to someone else just because they are downtrodden, poor, on welfare, etc....First of all, it's not that person's disc to give away, and doing so isn't considered stealing? HUH?
It is my hope Cinavia is the DRM that will put the clamps on this activity, but I'm wise enough to know it's a possibility that it can be broken, but it's ability to adapt is different and that firmware updates can force it onto devices....Like I said before, this DRM is badass......
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
8. January 2012 @ 14:55 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by donthetech:
Originally posted by darkflux:
Originally posted by donthetech:
Originally posted by darkflux:
Originally posted by donthetech:
Look, I did not accuse you of stealing, just read what is in bold type...THAT is what I was commenting on....If you bought the disc, then no biggie.....
and just what is wrong with sharing? i bought the movie. should i not be allowed to share it?
i could copy the parts for a Ferrari and build my own, it still doesn't make it stealing...
Granted, but I'm willing to bet you will need licensing from Ferrari to copy those parts in order for it to be legal, inj which case you bought the licensing so it's ok to make the part.....You can't tell me that THIS part of your post doesn't condone stealing. "remember, most downloaders only download because they can't AFFORD to rent them (or buy them for that matter, especially with the economy like it is). some of us may be able to afford to buy BR discs in bulk, but those of us living on a dollar a day (or less) due to bills can barely afford BLANK DVDs, let alone ones with content written on them!" You mean to tell me someone can't trot down to the ol' Redbox kiosk and pay 1.50 or whatever it is now and rent a movie? C'mon! Again, if you bought the movie, you paid for it, so if you want to share something you paid for for free, more power to you....I don't mean having people over to watch the film, I mean giving a film you bought to someone else to copy....I know about the Doctrine of First Sale, but giving a new release DVD or Blu-ray to a friend or relative TO COPY it is a non-starter for me......
okay, one: you only need a license to copy a part if it is
a. an exact duplicate, and
b. you are planning on selling it, or selling it as a Ferrari, at the very least. you know how many cars have IDENTICAL insides, but the outside looks different, and so they are able to sell them as "different" cars?!? check some Haynes manuals out, and then get back to me, as i have YET to see anyone SELLING or MAKING MONEY from copying DVDs. typically, it is the opposite...
and two: i know MANY people who CAN rent RedBox movies, and some DO! then they get them home and copy them, so that they can share the "wealth" with their family and friends, who may be jobless, or on just enough welfare for food. why should the innocent suffer while around the corner or down the block, somebody is laughing and gleeful, watching whatever horrible Adam Sandler movie they've cooked up this month?
Ok, To your first point, I am not going to digress away from the main issue of piracy....As for people who try to sell copied rental DVD's, I knew a number of them and blew in each one to the authorities as I do not condone the practice....
To your second point, are you kidding me? This is the very reason a DRM like Cinavia exists in the first place...So it's ok for someone to RENT a movie, copy it and give it away to someone else just because they are downtrodden, poor, on welfare, etc....First of all, it's not that person's disc to give away, and doing so isn't considered stealing? HUH?
It is my hope Cinavia is the DRM that will put the clamps on this activity, but I'm wise enough to know it's a possibility that it can be broken, but it's ability to adapt is different and that firmware updates can force it onto devices....Like I said before, this DRM is badass......
if badass means taking away your ability to make 1 copy and interfering with hardware interfaces(check starforce it was so badass it destroyed peoples harddrives) then yeah its pretty dame good at breaking its own law or making other people break it, so badass man.
Powered By
 |
|
donthetech
Newbie
|
8. January 2012 @ 19:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
if badass means taking away your ability to make 1 copy and interfering with hardware interfaces(check starforce it was so badass it destroyed peoples harddrives) then yeah its pretty dame good at breaking its own law or making other people break it, so badass man.
That is the dilemma, isn't it?....How do the content owners protect their movies, etc, from piracy while allowing legit owners of discs to make a backup copy without breaking encryption?
It's not breaking the law, it MADE the law, with the help of Congress...I always wonder who the moron was that helped pass a law where people are allowed to make a backup, but have to break encryption in order to do it?
If Starforce did that to people's hard drives, it was badass, no doubt.....
I think the closest thing to anything addressing this issue is Ultraviolet ecosystem.....If the hype is realized, I think it could be a good thing for digital distribution, get away from physical discs, and purchase digital downloads for storage locally....I am doing that now with some online services...
Some may be interested in the concept, others will continue to pirate as long as they can because they don't want to pay for content under any circumstances.....
|
Member
|
9. January 2012 @ 15:14 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by klonk:
Originally posted by darkflux:
Originally posted by klonk:
I just wanted to inform you that regular DVDs rented from Redbox, BlockbusterExpress, or Netflix, NOT BR discs, some have Cinavia on them. So using DVDFab to copy a non-BR disc will prevent the PS3 from playing a copy of a non-BR disc on a PS3 also. My point is Cinavia is not only on BlueRay discs, but on regular DVDs as well.
it's begun...
I originally posted this on 04/02/2011 (post #81). At least with regular DVDs, you can play them on a non-Blue Ray player. You don't have that option with a Blue Ray player or a PS3.
hmm, sorry. i didn't realize you were talking about DVD. it didn't say so in your Post, so i thought you'd rented a BluRay. that sucks...
|
Member
|
9. January 2012 @ 15:23 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by donthetech:
Originally posted by darkflux:
Originally posted by donthetech:
Originally posted by darkflux:
Originally posted by donthetech:
Look, I did not accuse you of stealing, just read what is in bold type...THAT is what I was commenting on....If you bought the disc, then no biggie.....
and just what is wrong with sharing? i bought the movie. should i not be allowed to share it?
i could copy the parts for a Ferrari and build my own, it still doesn't make it stealing...
Granted, but I'm willing to bet you will need licensing from Ferrari to copy those parts in order for it to be legal, inj which case you bought the licensing so it's ok to make the part.....You can't tell me that THIS part of your post doesn't condone stealing. "remember, most downloaders only download because they can't AFFORD to rent them (or buy them for that matter, especially with the economy like it is). some of us may be able to afford to buy BR discs in bulk, but those of us living on a dollar a day (or less) due to bills can barely afford BLANK DVDs, let alone ones with content written on them!" You mean to tell me someone can't trot down to the ol' Redbox kiosk and pay 1.50 or whatever it is now and rent a movie? C'mon! Again, if you bought the movie, you paid for it, so if you want to share something you paid for for free, more power to you....I don't mean having people over to watch the film, I mean giving a film you bought to someone else to copy....I know about the Doctrine of First Sale, but giving a new release DVD or Blu-ray to a friend or relative TO COPY it is a non-starter for me......
okay, one: you only need a license to copy a part if it is
a. an exact duplicate, and
b. you are planning on selling it, or selling it as a Ferrari, at the very least. you know how many cars have IDENTICAL insides, but the outside looks different, and so they are able to sell them as "different" cars?!? check some Haynes manuals out, and then get back to me, as i have YET to see anyone SELLING or MAKING MONEY from copying DVDs. typically, it is the opposite...
and two: i know MANY people who CAN rent RedBox movies, and some DO! then they get them home and copy them, so that they can share the "wealth" with their family and friends, who may be jobless, or on just enough welfare for food. why should the innocent suffer while around the corner or down the block, somebody is laughing and gleeful, watching whatever horrible Adam Sandler movie they've cooked up this month?
Ok, To your first point, I am not going to digress away from the main issue of piracy....As for people who try to sell copied rental DVD's, I knew a number of them and blew in each one to the authorities as I do not condone the practice....
To your second point, are you kidding me? This is the very reason a DRM like Cinavia exists in the first place...So it's ok for someone to RENT a movie, copy it and give it away to someone else just because they are downtrodden, poor, on welfare, etc....First of all, it's not that person's disc to give away, and doing so isn't considered stealing? HUH?
It is my hope Cinavia is the DRM that will put the clamps on this activity, but I'm wise enough to know it's a possibility that it can be broken, but it's ability to adapt is different and that firmware updates can force it onto devices....Like I said before, this DRM is badass......
i've not mentioned selling the copies i make once! i don't believe that THAT is ethical at all, especially since the people could've just gotten it for free (which is the point really).
and to the point of "it's not that person's disc to give"...so i bought it but it's not mine? that makes no sense, logically or otherwise. if i spend money on a dog, and it has puppies, does that mean the puppies are not mine to give away?
i'm not talking about "the laws" here, i'm talking about what's RIGHT! Hollywood has the billions of dollars to afford lobbyists to forge laws into place; laws that benefit NO ONE but them.
but the common man have no one to stand up for them! they are poor, and cannot afford due representation!
darkflux for President 2012, lol :D
darkflux
|
|
donthetech
Newbie
|
9. January 2012 @ 17:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
i've not mentioned selling the copies i make once! i don't believe that THAT is ethical at all, especially since the people could've just gotten it for free (which is the point really).
and to the point of "it's not that person's disc to give"...so i bought it but it's not mine? that makes no sense, logically or otherwise. if i spend money on a dog, and it has puppies, does that mean the puppies are not mine to give away?
i'm not talking about "the laws" here, i'm talking about what's RIGHT! Hollywood has the billions of dollars to afford lobbyists to forge laws into place; laws that benefit NO ONE but them.
but the common man have no one to stand up for them! they are poor, and cannot afford due representation!
darkflux for President 2012, lol :D
I did not accuse you of selling your copies, as along as you purchased, and not rented them, I think that would fall under the Doctrine of First Sale, where you could sell the original commercial discs to someone else....
Second, a copy of a RENTAL is NOT someone's to give because it was not PURCHASED....
Third, if a person really wants to protest what Hollywood is doing, BOYCOTT all their forms of entertainment.....Find something else to do with one's time....Hit them in the pocketbook, Don't go to the latest 3D IMAX extravaganza...don't rent anything from them, buy anything from them....
Unfortunately, a boycott is a pipe dream because not enough Americans
will stand together to do something like that...They are dumbed down and "need" their entertainment, well if that is the case, then they don't need to bitch when Hollywood puts the screws to them...And piracy will only make their resolve stronger and with govt's help, look out, bad things can happen...Look at SOPA/PIPA, I hope not, but it's a possibility that thing may become law......
I believe as consumers of all kinds of entertainment, we have the power of voting with our wallets who and who does not get our business....they NEED our money, we don't NEED their product.....bottom line, when the upcoming
"The Hobbit" movie comes out, when they turn the projector on, let 'em hear crickets!!!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 9. January 2012 @ 17:30
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
10. January 2012 @ 04:02 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by donthetech:
i've not mentioned selling the copies i make once! i don't believe that THAT is ethical at all, especially since the people could've just gotten it for free (which is the point really).
and to the point of "it's not that person's disc to give"...so i bought it but it's not mine? that makes no sense, logically or otherwise. if i spend money on a dog, and it has puppies, does that mean the puppies are not mine to give away?
i'm not talking about "the laws" here, i'm talking about what's RIGHT! Hollywood has the billions of dollars to afford lobbyists to forge laws into place; laws that benefit NO ONE but them.
but the common man have no one to stand up for them! they are poor, and cannot afford due representation!
darkflux for President 2012, lol :D
I did not accuse you of selling your copies, as along as you purchased, and not rented them, I think that would fall under the Doctrine of First Sale, where you could sell the original commercial discs to someone else....
Second, a copy of a RENTAL is NOT someone's to give because it was not PURCHASED....
Third, if a person really wants to protest what Hollywood is doing, BOYCOTT all their forms of entertainment.....Find something else to do with one's time....Hit them in the pocketbook, Don't go to the latest 3D IMAX extravaganza...don't rent anything from them, buy anything from them....
Unfortunately, a boycott is a pipe dream because not enough Americans
will stand together to do something like that...They are dumbed down and "need" their entertainment, well if that is the case, then they don't need to bitch when Hollywood puts the screws to them...And piracy will only make their resolve stronger and with govt's help, look out, bad things can happen...Look at SOPA/PIPA, I hope not, but it's a possibility that thing may become law......
I believe as consumers of all kinds of entertainment, we have the power of voting with our wallets who and who does not get our business....they NEED our money, we don't NEED their product.....bottom line, when the upcoming
"The Hobbit" movie comes out, when they turn the projector on, let 'em hear crickets!!!
Funny One could also say that downloading a film that costs the user nothing but time and bandwidth, it helps further the goal of boycotting while not harming the artists.
lets take a trip to notgunna happenland and every person decides to boycott the industry by your method, your method not only hurts the MPAA/RIAA but it hurts the artists and film makers as well.
Powered By
|
|
donthetech
Newbie
|
10. January 2012 @ 12:26 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by DXR88:
Originally posted by donthetech:
i've not mentioned selling the copies i make once! i don't believe that THAT is ethical at all, especially since the people could've just gotten it for free (which is the point really).
and to the point of "it's not that person's disc to give"...so i bought it but it's not mine? that makes no sense, logically or otherwise. if i spend money on a dog, and it has puppies, does that mean the puppies are not mine to give away?
i'm not talking about "the laws" here, i'm talking about what's RIGHT! Hollywood has the billions of dollars to afford lobbyists to forge laws into place; laws that benefit NO ONE but them.
but the common man have no one to stand up for them! they are poor, and cannot afford due representation!
darkflux for President 2012, lol :D
I did not accuse you of selling your copies, as along as you purchased, and not rented them, I think that would fall under the Doctrine of First Sale, where you could sell the original commercial discs to someone else....
Second, a copy of a RENTAL is NOT someone's to give because it was not PURCHASED....
Third, if a person really wants to protest what Hollywood is doing, BOYCOTT all their forms of entertainment.....Find something else to do with one's time....Hit them in the pocketbook, Don't go to the latest 3D IMAX extravaganza...don't rent anything from them, buy anything from them....
Unfortunately, a boycott is a pipe dream because not enough Americans
will stand together to do something like that...They are dumbed down and "need" their entertainment, well if that is the case, then they don't need to bitch when Hollywood puts the screws to them...And piracy will only make their resolve stronger and with govt's help, look out, bad things can happen...Look at SOPA/PIPA, I hope not, but it's a possibility that thing may become law......
I believe as consumers of all kinds of entertainment, we have the power of voting with our wallets who and who does not get our business....they NEED our money, we don't NEED their product.....bottom line, when the upcoming
"The Hobbit" movie comes out, when they turn the projector on, let 'em hear crickets!!!
Funny One could also say that downloading a film that costs the user nothing but time and bandwidth, it helps further the goal of boycotting while not harming the artists.
lets take a trip to notgunna happenland and every person decides to boycott the industry by your method, your method not only hurts the MPAA/RIAA but it hurts the artists and film makers as well.
Well we are gonna have to agree to disagree here...Your first statement that downloading costs the user only time and bandwith, uh, how about PAYING for the file they downloaded? This business about being able to download and copy content from disks without paying for it has to stop, and how is the theft of content supporting the artists?
As for your second point, if Hollywood is using draconian measures to make it difficult for consumers to purchase and fair use of content without breaking copyright, tough, let 'em all suffer...I don't hear major artists, actors, etc. wailing to protect consumer rights, screw them.....What the hell do I care if the major studios and film makers suffer? They make bazillions of dollars off the fools that continue to support them, despite being screwed by them.....as long as people maintain the status quo and continue to support Hollywood's products they are gonna get boned because Hollywood knows they have a captive audience.....
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
10. January 2012 @ 16:08 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by donthetech:
Originally posted by DXR88:
Originally posted by donthetech:
i've not mentioned selling the copies i make once! i don't believe that THAT is ethical at all, especially since the people could've just gotten it for free (which is the point really).
and to the point of "it's not that person's disc to give"...so i bought it but it's not mine? that makes no sense, logically or otherwise. if i spend money on a dog, and it has puppies, does that mean the puppies are not mine to give away?
i'm not talking about "the laws" here, i'm talking about what's RIGHT! Hollywood has the billions of dollars to afford lobbyists to forge laws into place; laws that benefit NO ONE but them.
but the common man have no one to stand up for them! they are poor, and cannot afford due representation!
darkflux for President 2012, lol :D
I did not accuse you of selling your copies, as along as you purchased, and not rented them, I think that would fall under the Doctrine of First Sale, where you could sell the original commercial discs to someone else....
Second, a copy of a RENTAL is NOT someone's to give because it was not PURCHASED....
Third, if a person really wants to protest what Hollywood is doing, BOYCOTT all their forms of entertainment.....Find something else to do with one's time....Hit them in the pocketbook, Don't go to the latest 3D IMAX extravaganza...don't rent anything from them, buy anything from them....
Unfortunately, a boycott is a pipe dream because not enough Americans
will stand together to do something like that...They are dumbed down and "need" their entertainment, well if that is the case, then they don't need to bitch when Hollywood puts the screws to them...And piracy will only make their resolve stronger and with govt's help, look out, bad things can happen...Look at SOPA/PIPA, I hope not, but it's a possibility that thing may become law......
I believe as consumers of all kinds of entertainment, we have the power of voting with our wallets who and who does not get our business....they NEED our money, we don't NEED their product.....bottom line, when the upcoming
"The Hobbit" movie comes out, when they turn the projector on, let 'em hear crickets!!!
Funny One could also say that downloading a film that costs the user nothing but time and bandwidth, it helps further the goal of boycotting while not harming the artists.
lets take a trip to notgunna happenland and every person decides to boycott the industry by your method, your method not only hurts the MPAA/RIAA but it hurts the artists and film makers as well.
Well we are gonna have to agree to disagree here...Your first statement that downloading costs the user only time and bandwith, uh, how about PAYING for the file they downloaded? This business about being able to download and copy content from disks without paying for it has to stop, and how is the theft of content supporting the artists?
As for your second point, if Hollywood is using draconian measures to make it difficult for consumers to purchase and fair use of content without breaking copyright, tough, let 'em all suffer...I don't hear major artists, actors, etc. wailing to protect consumer rights, screw them.....What the hell do I care if the major studios and film makers suffer? They make bazillions of dollars off the fools that continue to support them, despite being screwed by them.....as long as people maintain the status quo and continue to support Hollywood's products they are gonna get boned because Hollywood knows they have a captive audience.....
Art is meant to be seen. if people like what they see they will buy it, however it might hit the bargain bin before they do.
P2P is just another way for artists to get recognized, which should always be an artists goal. if that isn't there goal then they're industry sell outs only in it for the money there not artists at all.
before you go on about rentals who do you think pushes that garbage into the kiosks in the first place, i have yet to see a good top tier movie in any of the 30 red boxes Ive been to nor have i seen them in any of BB kiosks. granted maybe 15 to 25 days later they might have a recent release out.
IMHO, P2P supports the artists recognition, builds consumers trust with that artist, and shafts the industry all in one simple torrent file. if you feel like you need to give your money to someone put the cost of the movie/music in and envelope and send it to the artist.
Powered By
|
Member
|
10. January 2012 @ 17:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
okay, so here is my opinion, and you can feel free to disagree all that you like:
ALL art should be 100% free. it should be done as a work of passion, not a work for money (i actually believe this about all work, but one step at a time).
when you do something for money, i defaces the feeling and emotion that might have went into the art. i think that that is why there are so many movies with bad acting out there, because everybody wants to be the new "Matthew McConaughey" or "Jennifer Aniston" or whoever, instead of making art for art's sake.
i know an "artist" who puts everything he's got into his art, and puts himself into undue stress on a regular basis, in order to perfect his art, and he does it for FREE, not knowing if it will even be a masterpiece afterwards, but working towards making it perfect to HIM. it may not even be something that he will sell, and yet he gives it his all, and it usually ends up being awesome.
all artists should do what they do for art's sake, and if people like it enough to keep the artist in business, then fine, they will toss their money at them to keep them in business, rather than huge corporations making billions annually.
i don't think ANYONE deserves a million dollars for a job, and if they do, then WHERE'S MY MILLION? people are always complimenting me, but still i get paid next to nothing (i work with/for poor people). i do this all, often at my own expense! but i do it for the sake of doing it.
and so i copy movies :)
Edit:
oh, and i forgot to mention that i agree with everything that DXR88 said. in fact, he said what i was going to say before i ended up reading his posts! now that's service (though it cuts MY post count down, lol)!
darkflux
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. January 2012 @ 17:08
|
|
donthetech
Newbie
|
10. January 2012 @ 18:37 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by DXR88:
Originally posted by donthetech:
Originally posted by DXR88:
Originally posted by donthetech:
i've not mentioned selling the copies i make once! i don't believe that THAT is ethical at all, especially since the people could've just gotten it for free (which is the point really).
and to the point of "it's not that person's disc to give"...so i bought it but it's not mine? that makes no sense, logically or otherwise. if i spend money on a dog, and it has puppies, does that mean the puppies are not mine to give away?
i'm not talking about "the laws" here, i'm talking about what's RIGHT! Hollywood has the billions of dollars to afford lobbyists to forge laws into place; laws that benefit NO ONE but them.
but the common man have no one to stand up for them! they are poor, and cannot afford due representation!
darkflux for President 2012, lol :D
I did not accuse you of selling your copies, as along as you purchased, and not rented them, I think that would fall under the Doctrine of First Sale, where you could sell the original commercial discs to someone else....
Second, a copy of a RENTAL is NOT someone's to give because it was not PURCHASED....
Third, if a person really wants to protest what Hollywood is doing, BOYCOTT all their forms of entertainment.....Find something else to do with one's time....Hit them in the pocketbook, Don't go to the latest 3D IMAX extravaganza...don't rent anything from them, buy anything from them....
Unfortunately, a boycott is a pipe dream because not enough Americans
will stand together to do something like that...They are dumbed down and "need" their entertainment, well if that is the case, then they don't need to bitch when Hollywood puts the screws to them...And piracy will only make their resolve stronger and with govt's help, look out, bad things can happen...Look at SOPA/PIPA, I hope not, but it's a possibility that thing may become law......
I believe as consumers of all kinds of entertainment, we have the power of voting with our wallets who and who does not get our business....they NEED our money, we don't NEED their product.....bottom line, when the upcoming
"The Hobbit" movie comes out, when they turn the projector on, let 'em hear crickets!!!
Funny One could also say that downloading a film that costs the user nothing but time and bandwidth, it helps further the goal of boycotting while not harming the artists.
lets take a trip to notgunna happenland and every person decides to boycott the industry by your method, your method not only hurts the MPAA/RIAA but it hurts the artists and film makers as well.
Well we are gonna have to agree to disagree here...Your first statement that downloading costs the user only time and bandwith, uh, how about PAYING for the file they downloaded? This business about being able to download and copy content from disks without paying for it has to stop, and how is the theft of content supporting the artists?
As for your second point, if Hollywood is using draconian measures to make it difficult for consumers to purchase and fair use of content without breaking copyright, tough, let 'em all suffer...I don't hear major artists, actors, etc. wailing to protect consumer rights, screw them.....What the hell do I care if the major studios and film makers suffer? They make bazillions of dollars off the fools that continue to support them, despite being screwed by them.....as long as people maintain the status quo and continue to support Hollywood's products they are gonna get boned because Hollywood knows they have a captive audience.....
Art is meant to be seen. if people like what they see they will buy it, however it might hit the bargain bin before they do.
P2P is just another way for artists to get recognized, which should always be an artists goal. if that isn't there goal then they're industry sell outs only in it for the money there not artists at all.
before you go on about rentals who do you think pushes that garbage into the kiosks in the first place, i have yet to see a good top tier movie in any of the 30 red boxes Ive been to nor have i seen them in any of BB kiosks. granted maybe 15 to 25 days later they might have a recent release out.
IMHO, P2P supports the artists recognition, builds consumers trust with that artist, and shafts the industry all in one simple torrent file. if you feel like you need to give your money to someone put the cost of the movie/music in and envelope and send it to the artist.
You have some good points here, some artists have provided some of their work for free to fans....That's fine and a great promotional tool...My hope is that MORE of them do that, in the case of music, dump the labels...In my view it is the Artist that determines if their content is to be shared or not, or if they require compensation for their work...Granted, P2P can be a great promotional tool, as long as the artist gives permission to share his/her content, and does not want compensation for it....Anything else IMO is stealing, no matter how it's justified
I really must say, you had good stuff in your post, thanks for that....
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. January 2012 @ 18:39
|
|
donthetech
Newbie
|
10. January 2012 @ 19:27 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by darkflux:
okay, so here is my opinion, and you can feel free to disagree all that you like:
ALL art should be 100% free. it should be done as a work of passion, not a work for money (i actually believe this about all work, but one step at a time).
when you do something for money, i defaces the feeling and emotion that might have went into the art. i think that that is why there are so many movies with bad acting out there, because everybody wants to be the new "Matthew McConaughey" or "Jennifer Aniston" or whoever, instead of making art for art's sake.
i know an "artist" who puts everything he's got into his art, and puts himself into undue stress on a regular basis, in order to perfect his art, and he does it for FREE, not knowing if it will even be a masterpiece afterwards, but working towards making it perfect to HIM. it may not even be something that he will sell, and yet he gives it his all, and it usually ends up being awesome.
all artists should do what they do for art's sake, and if people like it enough to keep the artist in business, then fine, they will toss their money at them to keep them in business, rather than huge corporations making billions annually.
i don't think ANYONE deserves a million dollars for a job, and if they do, then WHERE'S MY MILLION? people are always complimenting me, but still i get paid next to nothing (i work with/for poor people). i do this all, often at my own expense! but i do it for the sake of doing it.
and so i copy movies :)
Edit:
oh, and i forgot to mention that i agree with everything that DXR88 said. in fact, he said what i was going to say before i ended up reading his posts! now that's service (though it cuts MY post count down, lol)!
There is no way I can justify your first statement, you mean to tell me James Cameron makes a movie called Avatar, spends MILLIONS to make it, he is supposed to make it available for FREE? I just can't understand the logic...You also think ALL work should be done for free, ok, how does a person support themselves with no income, your logic here doesn't make sense to me....
The artist you know, God Bless him for providing his work for free, however it is HIS CHOICE to do so, and you, for working with poor people, that is a good thing.....IMO, there is NOTHING wrong with wanting compensation for you work....
As for people who make a million dollars, to the people that PAY them, they have that much value(NFL, NBA, NHL, anyone?)...AS far as "Where's my million, what have you done to EARN that kind of money?
Anyway, I thank you and DXR88 for an engaging conversation about this topic without flame wars, we did get off topic though, the topic involved Cinavia....Sorry about that....You guys have a great day and the best to you both......
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
10. January 2012 @ 22:15 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by donthetech:
Originally posted by darkflux:
okay, so here is my opinion, and you can feel free to disagree all that you like:
ALL art should be 100% free. it should be done as a work of passion, not a work for money (i actually believe this about all work, but one step at a time).
when you do something for money, i defaces the feeling and emotion that might have went into the art. i think that that is why there are so many movies with bad acting out there, because everybody wants to be the new "Matthew McConaughey" or "Jennifer Aniston" or whoever, instead of making art for art's sake.
i know an "artist" who puts everything he's got into his art, and puts himself into undue stress on a regular basis, in order to perfect his art, and he does it for FREE, not knowing if it will even be a masterpiece afterwards, but working towards making it perfect to HIM. it may not even be something that he will sell, and yet he gives it his all, and it usually ends up being awesome.
all artists should do what they do for art's sake, and if people like it enough to keep the artist in business, then fine, they will toss their money at them to keep them in business, rather than huge corporations making billions annually.
i don't think ANYONE deserves a million dollars for a job, and if they do, then WHERE'S MY MILLION? people are always complimenting me, but still i get paid next to nothing (i work with/for poor people). i do this all, often at my own expense! but i do it for the sake of doing it.
and so i copy movies :)
Edit:
oh, and i forgot to mention that i agree with everything that DXR88 said. in fact, he said what i was going to say before i ended up reading his posts! now that's service (though it cuts MY post count down, lol)!
There is no way I can justify your first statement, you mean to tell me James Cameron makes a movie called Avatar, spends MILLIONS to make it, he is supposed to make it available for FREE? I just can't understand the logic...You also think ALL work should be done for free, ok, how does a person support themselves with no income, your logic here doesn't make sense to me....
The artist you know, God Bless him for providing his work for free, however it is HIS CHOICE to do so, and you, for working with poor people, that is a good thing.....IMO, there is NOTHING wrong with wanting compensation for you work....
As for people who make a million dollars, to the people that PAY them, they have that much value(NFL, NBA, NHL, anyone?)...AS far as "Where's my million, what have you done to EARN that kind of money?
Anyway, I thank you and DXR88 for an engaging conversation about this topic without flame wars, we did get off topic though, the topic involved Cinavia....Sorry about that....You guys have a great day and the best to you both......
don't twist my statements, i didn't say free i said reasonably priced 5-8 bucks is reasonably priced, 25 Bucks is not.
but your right this is about cinavia.
Powered By
|
|
SProdigy
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
10. January 2012 @ 23:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
Like someone said above... I believe most athletes have a union contract for 55% of the total revenue, ie. the NFL teams' revenue. Still that's a little more than HALF! Those players (or artists in case of the above arguments) just want their slice of the pie. I know I would too. I sure wouldn't accept 50k for my work when the company's making 100 million off of it!
|
Member
|
11. January 2012 @ 19:46 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by SProdigy:
Like someone said above... I believe most athletes have a union contract for 55% of the total revenue, ie. the NFL teams' revenue. Still that's a little more than HALF! Those players (or artists in case of the above arguments) just want their slice of the pie. I know I would too. I sure wouldn't accept 50k for my work when the company's making 100 million off of it!
if the NFL, etc. didn't charge so much for tickets, they wouldn't have the money to pay the millions to the athletes.
i think that the LEAST they could do would be to charge less for tickets! it's hard enough to get them when you want them, without being charged an arm and two legs...
darkflux
|
Member
|
11. January 2012 @ 19:55 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by donthetech:
Originally posted by darkflux:
okay, so here is my opinion, and you can feel free to disagree all that you like:
ALL art should be 100% free. it should be done as a work of passion, not a work for money (i actually believe this about all work, but one step at a time).
when you do something for money, i defaces the feeling and emotion that might have went into the art. i think that that is why there are so many movies with bad acting out there, because everybody wants to be the new "Matthew McConaughey" or "Jennifer Aniston" or whoever, instead of making art for art's sake.
i know an "artist" who puts everything he's got into his art, and puts himself into undue stress on a regular basis, in order to perfect his art, and he does it for FREE, not knowing if it will even be a masterpiece afterwards, but working towards making it perfect to HIM. it may not even be something that he will sell, and yet he gives it his all, and it usually ends up being awesome.
all artists should do what they do for art's sake, and if people like it enough to keep the artist in business, then fine, they will toss their money at them to keep them in business, rather than huge corporations making billions annually.
i don't think ANYONE deserves a million dollars for a job, and if they do, then WHERE'S MY MILLION? people are always complimenting me, but still i get paid next to nothing (i work with/for poor people). i do this all, often at my own expense! but i do it for the sake of doing it.
and so i copy movies :)
Edit:
oh, and i forgot to mention that i agree with everything that DXR88 said. in fact, he said what i was going to say before i ended up reading his posts! now that's service (though it cuts MY post count down, lol)!
There is no way I can justify your first statement, you mean to tell me James Cameron makes a movie called Avatar, spends MILLIONS to make it, he is supposed to make it available for FREE? I just can't understand the logic...You also think ALL work should be done for free, ok, how does a person support themselves with no income, your logic here doesn't make sense to me....
The artist you know, God Bless him for providing his work for free, however it is HIS CHOICE to do so, and you, for working with poor people, that is a good thing.....IMO, there is NOTHING wrong with wanting compensation for you work....
As for people who make a million dollars, to the people that PAY them, they have that much value(NFL, NBA, NHL, anyone?)...AS far as "Where's my million, what have you done to EARN that kind of money?
Anyway, I thank you and DXR88 for an engaging conversation about this topic without flame wars, we did get off topic though, the topic involved Cinavia....Sorry about that....You guys have a great day and the best to you both......
okay, regarding the cost of making movies, i believe this segways into my statement i made about "all people working for free". if EVERYONE only worked for the happiness of others, then EVERYONE would be happy, and you wouldn't NEED money! plus, the people making others happy would earn the respect of others, which would give them an incentive to do more gratis.
of course, the world is full of greedy ba$tard$, and so we must "pay to be happy". what a world. this is my way of rebelling. do things because they are good, NOT for money.
and the statement i made about "my million" was me being facetious. i would never think of ACCEPTING a million for anything i do, whether i deserved it or not.
and i'm always happy to provide "flame-free" conversation :) i believe that as soon as a person starts flaming the boards, it is evident that they are biased in their logic, and so i leave the conversation at that point...
darkflux
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey_P
Senior Member
|
11. January 2012 @ 21:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
Maybe a smackdown forum would help. Let it roll in smackdown!
Jeff
|
|
