6 ms·

>Nobody deserves to have their hard work stolen First off, it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. No one's stealing their content, because the copyright

>Nobody deserves to have their hard work stolen First off, it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. No one's stealing their content, because the copyright holders still have it. Stealing is wrong because it deprives the owner of the use of that thing: if I steal your car, then you can't drive to work any more. If I sneakily scan your car with a tricorder and 3D-print a clone of it, you still have your car. Semantics aside, I completely disagree about them deserving to have their hard work copied and not getting paid for it. They absolutely do deserve this. If someone works hard on some piece of art (music, movie, etc.) and makes it conveniently available to everyone at the same fair price, then I think they deserve to get paid for it. But if they're dicks and they use their dominant position and inertia to promote their works and make them popular and culturally relevant, but then they only make them available to some people and not to others because they're trying to figure out unethical ways of gaming the system to make more money, then fuck 'em. People in other regions where this stuff isn't available have every right to copy it without paying. These copyright holders have been bitching for many years about "piracy". Then along came the iTunes Store, Netflix, etc., and they proved that people are willing to pay for this stuff as long as it's a fair price and is convenient. Now they want to dick with it, so predictably, people are going back to piracy. Personally, I'd rather not bother with piracy: it's a PITA to use BitTorrent, try to find good versions of stuff, hope there's enough seeders out there, wait forever for it to download (not a problem if it's extremely popular that day, but a big problem if it's not), etc. I'd much rather pay $8/month for Netflix and just select what I want to see, hit "play" and watch it. But if the copyright holders are going to kill the goose that laid the golden egg, then oh well...

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
mbrock 11y ago
The problem with Netflix, to me, is that relying on it means that I restrict myself to their very limited selection. The only place I know where I can reliably find copies of high-quality cinema is a private torrent tracker... and some public libraries, but I don't own a DVD unit (and don't want one). Sure, there might be some legal way to gain semi-convenient access to the library of cinematic culture, but I don't know about it. It's kind of tragic. Like, people seriously claim Netflix as some sort of alternative to pirate copying... and I go into the Swedish Netflix and search for "Bergman" and get one result: Casablanca. iTunes's selection is wider, but still, I search for "Tarkovsky" and there's zilch. "Ozu", nothing. "Renoir", nah. Oh, they do have one Murnau, the newly restored Nosferatu. No Eisenstein, Dreyer, or Godard. And so on. Of course it's all because of copyright restrictions and maybe a lack of projected profits from these art films. That's exactly the point. Pirate copying is a way for people to share this material without being restricted by such tedious limitations.
- geodel 11y ago
  Perhaps this might be useful when it is available: http://filmstruck.com/ http://filmstruck.com/
  - mbrock 11y ago
    Maybe, but I can't tell from the press release or the website whether it will be available internationally, and it seems likely that it will (at least initially) be a US-only deal.
sbarre 11y ago
> People in other regions where this stuff isn't available have every right to copy it without paying. I think you've got this wrong. The people in other regions don't have "every right to copy it", they have "every right to not consume it". Don't like the rules? Don't play. It's their content, so they set the rules. That's kind of all there is to it. I absolutely agree that you can be pissed off about this and not like it though. But nothing gives you the "right" to force your way into someone else's party just because you weren't invited, or didn't like the ticket price. If you think like that, you're as much of a dick as the people you seem to be mad at. So unless you are using the word "unethical" in an ironic fashion when you describe what they do, you probably should not use it at all if you're then going to condone what is essentially an unethical response yourself.
- Grishnakh 11y ago
  >The people in other regions don't have "every right to copy it", they have "every right to not consume it". Don't like the rules? Don't play. It's their content, so they set the rules. >But nothing gives you the "right" to force your way into someone else's party just because you weren't invited, or didn't like the ticket price. Completely wrong on both counts. If I'm not invited to someone else's party, but I want to observe it without interfering with the partygoers, I have every right to invent a device which allows me to create an artificial wormhole which then allows me to remotely observe this party (see the Arthur C. Clarke book "Light of Other Days"). The partygoers will have no idea I'm observing them and since they wouldn't sell me a ticket anyway, they won't see a difference in their revenues. Similarly, if content holders don't bother to offer their wares to me and then make it too difficult for me to acquire them with a workaround (subscription + VPN), then I have every right to download a copy. As above, they have no idea that I'm watching their content, and since they didn't offer it to me for sale anyway, they won't see a difference in their revenues. >if you're then going to condone what is essentially an unethical response yourself. I'm not condoning an unethical response, I'm condoning an ethical one. Ethics are in the eye of the beholder; for some people, it's completely ethical to hack someone's head off if they don't follow the correct religion. I choose to reject your system of ethics which grants all power to large, moneyed interests.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

mbrock 11y ago

The problem with Netflix, to me, is that relying on it means that I restrict myself to their very limited selection. The only place I know where I can reliably find copies of high-quality cinema is a private torrent tracker... and some public libraries, but I don't own a DVD unit (and don't want one). Sure, there might be some legal way to gain semi-convenient access to the library of cinematic culture, but I don't know about it. It's kind of tragic. Like, people seriously claim Netflix as some sort of alternative to pirate copying... and I go into the Swedish Netflix and search for "Bergman" and get one result: Casablanca. iTunes's selection is wider, but still, I search for "Tarkovsky" and there's zilch. "Ozu", nothing. "Renoir", nah. Oh, they do have one Murnau, the newly restored Nosferatu. No Eisenstein, Dreyer, or Godard. And so on. Of course it's all because of copyright restrictions and maybe a lack of projected profits from these art films. That's exactly the point. Pirate copying is a way for people to share this material without being restricted by such tedious limitations.

geodel 11y ago
Perhaps this might be useful when it is available: http://filmstruck.com/ http://filmstruck.com/
- mbrock 11y ago
  Maybe, but I can't tell from the press release or the website whether it will be available internationally, and it seems likely that it will (at least initially) be a US-only deal.

sbarre 11y ago

> People in other regions where this stuff isn't available have every right to copy it without paying. I think you've got this wrong. The people in other regions don't have "every right to copy it", they have "every right to not consume it". Don't like the rules? Don't play. It's their content, so they set the rules. That's kind of all there is to it. I absolutely agree that you can be pissed off about this and not like it though. But nothing gives you the "right" to force your way into someone else's party just because you weren't invited, or didn't like the ticket price. If you think like that, you're as much of a dick as the people you seem to be mad at. So unless you are using the word "unethical" in an ironic fashion when you describe what they do, you probably should not use it at all if you're then going to condone what is essentially an unethical response yourself.

Grishnakh 11y ago
>The people in other regions don't have "every right to copy it", they have "every right to not consume it". Don't like the rules? Don't play. It's their content, so they set the rules. >But nothing gives you the "right" to force your way into someone else's party just because you weren't invited, or didn't like the ticket price. Completely wrong on both counts. If I'm not invited to someone else's party, but I want to observe it without interfering with the partygoers, I have every right to invent a device which allows me to create an artificial wormhole which then allows me to remotely observe this party (see the Arthur C. Clarke book "Light of Other Days"). The partygoers will have no idea I'm observing them and since they wouldn't sell me a ticket anyway, they won't see a difference in their revenues. Similarly, if content holders don't bother to offer their wares to me and then make it too difficult for me to acquire them with a workaround (subscription + VPN), then I have every right to download a copy. As above, they have no idea that I'm watching their content, and since they didn't offer it to me for sale anyway, they won't see a difference in their revenues. >if you're then going to condone what is essentially an unethical response yourself. I'm not condoning an unethical response, I'm condoning an ethical one. Ethics are in the eye of the beholder; for some people, it's completely ethical to hack someone's head off if they don't follow the correct religion. I choose to reject your system of ethics which grants all power to large, moneyed interests.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]