4 ms·

One major thing to note is that this is an Australian study, so the perspective is Australian in nature. Obtaining content over here, legally, is incredibly di

by froo 16y ago

One major thing to note is that this is an Australian study, so the perspective is Australian in nature. Obtaining content over here, legally, is incredibly difficult - even if you are trying to pay for it. I've said this for awhile (in fact, I said it on HN about a year ago) that there is something seriously wrong with the system when the path of least resistance to content for many consumers is not legal. We want to give the studios our money (this study while not comprehensive is at least indicative of a general feeling)... we just cant. I've often tried to obtain the latest content via itunes or wherever, it's simply not available in the vast majority of cases.

roel_v 16y ago
"One major thing to note is that this is an Australian study, so the perspective is Australian in nature." What makes this market special? Is there any reason to believe (e.g. when looking at software piracy numbers, which for the purposes of these discussions are comparable to other forms of copyright infringement) that Australians are more likely to abide by license terms than others, when put in a situation where they do have options that are non-infringing? The "we don't have access to legal ways of acquiring media" is a straw man argument most of the time that it's made, from my own observations. Introducing legal means does not reduce piracy rates in the cases where it has been tried so far, for example in the US or in Europe (I'm in Europe). Usually, as soon as online stores for music and video are introduced, the complaints shift to 'oh but it's too expensive'. I feel that 200k is too much for that Lamborghine Gallardo that I've go my eye on too, yet I don't hear anyone starting political parties trying to set a price ceiling on Italian sports cars, like in the digital goods world where so many are intent on trying to interrupt free markets and forcing content producers to sell their products under the price they deem optimal for the product they sell. I'm slipping into rant mode now, but a lot of online video stores have popped up the last year here in the Netherlands. Some shows are offered on one store, some on others, but in general (across all stores) there is quite a large selection available. Not everything you can get on DVD is available online, but that's hardly reasonable to expect. You know what the new complaint from the 'it's digital so it should be free!' freeloaders is? 'Oh those media conglomerates are evil, because we can't get everything from one store!'. That's ridiculous and in my eyes only shows that most of these people will not stop until there are laws in place to, by force of the state, steal the products of the minds of creators right from under them - to take from creators the rights to appropriate the products of their minds as they themselves see fit. 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need' - yeah right, and those with the most needs just happen to be those with the least abilities. Screw them.
- robryan 16y ago
  The special thing is basically not being able to legally view shows when they first air overseas. Services like itunes are forced to put geo restrictions on things because of the local rights holders I'd imagine. Regularly these shows could air months later, if there intermittently within a few weeks the TV networks seem pretty impressed with themselves. There have been times in the past where I have attempted to pay for shows and this restriction prevented me.
  - froo 16y ago
    >There have been times in the past where I have attempted to pay for shows and this restriction prevented me. Exactly, I've got no problems paying for content. In my case, I pay for music off iTunes, I prefer to watch movies in the cinema when they come out, but I regularly download television episodes off Bitorrent. It's not that I don't want to pay for TV shows (I have pay tv etc), I simply just cannot get my hands on them in any kind of reasonable time frame... often 6+ months after they air elsewhere, sometimes up to a year. When we live in a world where I chat to people on the other side of the world as often and easily as I do my next door neighbour and I'm unable to keep up with conversations about shows due to licensing deals, of course I'm going to attempt to download them off p2p networks. Rights holders can bitch all they want, but in reality, they can't expect people to pay for something they're not offering for sale.
- sdgdthfd 16y ago
  Expense is not necessarily in absolute terms, it's relative in my case. I outright refuse to buy label albums because I won't support the music industry as-is, I'll only buy music if the people who made it get the vast majority of the money. Have you read Steve Albini's take on the music industry? It is entirely accurate, and I will never put my money into keeping that system alive just on principle. Anyone who has ethical problems with piracy but not the music industry either doesn't know the music industry, or doesn't know anything much about anything, IMHO. PS: Last I heard, when you take a Gallardo that you're not entitled to take, the original one disappears. Piracy is not the same as theft. PPS: I say all this as a semi-pro musician trying to make it myself, and not quite managing it yet. I don't begrudge people who've downloaded my music without paying for a second.

by froo 16y ago

roel_v 16y ago

"One major thing to note is that this is an Australian study, so the perspective is Australian in nature." What makes this market special? Is there any reason to believe (e.g. when looking at software piracy numbers, which for the purposes of these discussions are comparable to other forms of copyright infringement) that Australians are more likely to abide by license terms than others, when put in a situation where they do have options that are non-infringing? The "we don't have access to legal ways of acquiring media" is a straw man argument most of the time that it's made, from my own observations. Introducing legal means does not reduce piracy rates in the cases where it has been tried so far, for example in the US or in Europe (I'm in Europe). Usually, as soon as online stores for music and video are introduced, the complaints shift to 'oh but it's too expensive'. I feel that 200k is too much for that Lamborghine Gallardo that I've go my eye on too, yet I don't hear anyone starting political parties trying to set a price ceiling on Italian sports cars, like in the digital goods world where so many are intent on trying to interrupt free markets and forcing content producers to sell their products under the price they deem optimal for the product they sell. I'm slipping into rant mode now, but a lot of online video stores have popped up the last year here in the Netherlands. Some shows are offered on one store, some on others, but in general (across all stores) there is quite a large selection available. Not everything you can get on DVD is available online, but that's hardly reasonable to expect. You know what the new complaint from the 'it's digital so it should be free!' freeloaders is? 'Oh those media conglomerates are evil, because we can't get everything from one store!'. That's ridiculous and in my eyes only shows that most of these people will not stop until there are laws in place to, by force of the state, steal the products of the minds of creators right from under them - to take from creators the rights to appropriate the products of their minds as they themselves see fit. 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need' - yeah right, and those with the most needs just happen to be those with the least abilities. Screw them.

robryan 16y ago
The special thing is basically not being able to legally view shows when they first air overseas. Services like itunes are forced to put geo restrictions on things because of the local rights holders I'd imagine. Regularly these shows could air months later, if there intermittently within a few weeks the TV networks seem pretty impressed with themselves. There have been times in the past where I have attempted to pay for shows and this restriction prevented me.
- froo 16y ago
  >There have been times in the past where I have attempted to pay for shows and this restriction prevented me. Exactly, I've got no problems paying for content. In my case, I pay for music off iTunes, I prefer to watch movies in the cinema when they come out, but I regularly download television episodes off Bitorrent. It's not that I don't want to pay for TV shows (I have pay tv etc), I simply just cannot get my hands on them in any kind of reasonable time frame... often 6+ months after they air elsewhere, sometimes up to a year. When we live in a world where I chat to people on the other side of the world as often and easily as I do my next door neighbour and I'm unable to keep up with conversations about shows due to licensing deals, of course I'm going to attempt to download them off p2p networks. Rights holders can bitch all they want, but in reality, they can't expect people to pay for something they're not offering for sale.
sdgdthfd 16y ago
Expense is not necessarily in absolute terms, it's relative in my case. I outright refuse to buy label albums because I won't support the music industry as-is, I'll only buy music if the people who made it get the vast majority of the money. Have you read Steve Albini's take on the music industry? It is entirely accurate, and I will never put my money into keeping that system alive just on principle. Anyone who has ethical problems with piracy but not the music industry either doesn't know the music industry, or doesn't know anything much about anything, IMHO. PS: Last I heard, when you take a Gallardo that you're not entitled to take, the original one disappears. Piracy is not the same as theft. PPS: I say all this as a semi-pro musician trying to make it myself, and not quite managing it yet. I don't begrudge people who've downloaded my music without paying for a second.