4 ms·

The purpose is to be a signal to the distributor: "fix your payment model or we're not paying". I pirated for a long time. When Netflix became a thing, I stoppe

The purpose is to be a signal to the distributor: "fix your payment model or we're not paying". I pirated for a long time. When Netflix became a thing, I stopped pirating (since it was easier). Now I pirate again. If a new company came along with a good model, or the industry as a whole decided this streaming debacle is stupid, I would definitely stop pirating and give my money to someone. Until then, why would I pay money for a worse service than what I can get for free?

CabSauce 5y ago
Wouldn't the appropriate choice be to not pay for the service AND not pirate? That seems like the best way to send the message. Pirating gives the impression that you want to view their content but not pay for it. So they should invest in locking down their content, not improve their experience.
- dj_mc_merlin 5y ago
  Yes, I'm interested in their content. I'm not interested in their byzantine ways of inventing 20 million new streaming services that I need to subscribe to in order to watch one single show I want. > So they should invest in locking down their content, not improve their experience. Good luck with that.
- ipaddr 5y ago
  Then they would replace the content but not the system. If you like the content pirate it. They may add more drm like music companies or they may reduce prices or they may make streaming easier. Ignoring it sends a different message.
- Stunting 5y ago
  purchase the shows you want to watch individually.
  - Hitton 5y ago
    How do I do that? For instance imagine I would like to watch Book of Boba Fett (just an example, I saw it mentioned somewhere today). I don't think that Disney allows to purchase it individually, but I can only guess, because in the sticks where I live (EU country), Disney+ isn't even available. That reminds me, what do you think about geoblocking these services? If one has a choice: buy the content, buy VPN and break the copyright by watching it in unsupported country or just break the copyright by pirating it outright, what should one do?
    - Stunting 5y ago
      Boba fett is not provided individually. The cost value of producing that show is driving people to a subscription system. If you don't want to do that, don't sign up for it. If you want to watch that show but you don't want to pay for subscription, let DIsney know. If the market demanded it by way of retracting their subscription dollars, they would notice. But if you steal it because that's just how you want to do things, you're a thief.
      - Hitton 5y ago
        It was your suggestion to purchase individual shows. >If the market demanded it by way of retracting their subscription dollars, they would notice. One could say that pirating is the act of retracting the subscription dollars, but I digress. I can't retract my subscription dollars, because they won't even offer me the subscription (which I mentioned in my comment). Could you as an knowledgeable insider actually answer the part of my previous comment you conveniently skipped, that part about what is person supposed to do if the Disney doesn't even offer the service in their country? And don't say "let Disney know", something actionable please. >But if you steal it because that's just how you want to do things, you're a thief. 1) it's not theft, it's digital "piracy" 2) And I didn't say I pirate their stuff, the show was just an example. But I still feel discriminated on account of country I am from by them refusing to sell me their subscription service. And everyone knows that racism is worse than stealing.
- ncallaway 5y ago
  That sends the wrong message. If you're interested in the content, but dislike the delivery mechanism, ignoring the content entirely sends the signal: "I am not interested in the content you're producing". The companies will attempt to address that signal by changing the content, to try and find content that attracts larger audiences. Piracy sends a different signal: "I am interested in the content, but not the price or the delivery mechanism". The companies will attempt to address that signal differently. Maybe they lower the price. Maybe the ease the friction on the delivery mechanism. Maybe the increase the friction on the delivery mechanism (by adding DRM). But the signal from piracy sends a more clear message to the content companies that ignoring the content.
barkerja 5y ago
What is a "good model" to you?
- dj_mc_merlin 5y ago
  Effort of buying legally < effort of downloading illegally Netflix did it (once upon a time. no, not the movie). I don't really care for reasons why this is hard for the industry or really anything else. As long as it doesn't economically make sense for me to give money to someone (doesn't reduce my own effort/time expenditure or provide something I can't have otherwise), I will not give money to someone. Morals be damned.
  - 6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago
    You can rent on many of the streaming services for like $3, which blows a hole in the “it’s just effort” argument.
    - pineconewarrior 5y ago
      acquiring currency requires effort. Considerable effort, for some. One can click on a torrent link way faster than they can earn $3 Plus, this rental will not be available in all locales, for every video, etc
    - dj_mc_merlin 5y ago
      That's Amazon AFAIK, I don't know of any others. It's a step in the right direction but the price is still too high (it's usually $4-$5 in my experience). I only get to watch it once, not keep it, and I pay you double what I used to pay Blockbuster? No thanks.
      - brewdad 5y ago
        Blockbuster new releases were $3 in 1990 dollars ($6.60 today). This was in a mid-sized town in the midwest, not Manhattan or LA. Blockbuster was also far less convenient.

CabSauce 5y ago

Wouldn't the appropriate choice be to not pay for the service AND not pirate? That seems like the best way to send the message. Pirating gives the impression that you want to view their content but not pay for it. So they should invest in locking down their content, not improve their experience.

dj_mc_merlin 5y ago
Yes, I'm interested in their content. I'm not interested in their byzantine ways of inventing 20 million new streaming services that I need to subscribe to in order to watch one single show I want. > So they should invest in locking down their content, not improve their experience. Good luck with that.
ipaddr 5y ago
Then they would replace the content but not the system. If you like the content pirate it. They may add more drm like music companies or they may reduce prices or they may make streaming easier. Ignoring it sends a different message.
Stunting 5y ago
purchase the shows you want to watch individually.
- Hitton 5y ago
  How do I do that? For instance imagine I would like to watch Book of Boba Fett (just an example, I saw it mentioned somewhere today). I don't think that Disney allows to purchase it individually, but I can only guess, because in the sticks where I live (EU country), Disney+ isn't even available. That reminds me, what do you think about geoblocking these services? If one has a choice: buy the content, buy VPN and break the copyright by watching it in unsupported country or just break the copyright by pirating it outright, what should one do?
  - Stunting 5y ago
    Boba fett is not provided individually. The cost value of producing that show is driving people to a subscription system. If you don't want to do that, don't sign up for it. If you want to watch that show but you don't want to pay for subscription, let DIsney know. If the market demanded it by way of retracting their subscription dollars, they would notice. But if you steal it because that's just how you want to do things, you're a thief.
    - Hitton 5y ago
      It was your suggestion to purchase individual shows. >If the market demanded it by way of retracting their subscription dollars, they would notice. One could say that pirating is the act of retracting the subscription dollars, but I digress. I can't retract my subscription dollars, because they won't even offer me the subscription (which I mentioned in my comment). Could you as an knowledgeable insider actually answer the part of my previous comment you conveniently skipped, that part about what is person supposed to do if the Disney doesn't even offer the service in their country? And don't say "let Disney know", something actionable please. >But if you steal it because that's just how you want to do things, you're a thief. 1) it's not theft, it's digital "piracy" 2) And I didn't say I pirate their stuff, the show was just an example. But I still feel discriminated on account of country I am from by them refusing to sell me their subscription service. And everyone knows that racism is worse than stealing.
ncallaway 5y ago
That sends the wrong message. If you're interested in the content, but dislike the delivery mechanism, ignoring the content entirely sends the signal: "I am not interested in the content you're producing". The companies will attempt to address that signal by changing the content, to try and find content that attracts larger audiences. Piracy sends a different signal: "I am interested in the content, but not the price or the delivery mechanism". The companies will attempt to address that signal differently. Maybe they lower the price. Maybe the ease the friction on the delivery mechanism. Maybe the increase the friction on the delivery mechanism (by adding DRM). But the signal from piracy sends a more clear message to the content companies that ignoring the content.

barkerja 5y ago

What is a "good model" to you?

dj_mc_merlin 5y ago
Effort of buying legally < effort of downloading illegally Netflix did it (once upon a time. no, not the movie). I don't really care for reasons why this is hard for the industry or really anything else. As long as it doesn't economically make sense for me to give money to someone (doesn't reduce my own effort/time expenditure or provide something I can't have otherwise), I will not give money to someone. Morals be damned.
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 5y ago
  You can rent on many of the streaming services for like $3, which blows a hole in the “it’s just effort” argument.
  - pineconewarrior 5y ago
    acquiring currency requires effort. Considerable effort, for some. One can click on a torrent link way faster than they can earn $3 Plus, this rental will not be available in all locales, for every video, etc
  - dj_mc_merlin 5y ago
    That's Amazon AFAIK, I don't know of any others. It's a step in the right direction but the price is still too high (it's usually $4-$5 in my experience). I only get to watch it once, not keep it, and I pay you double what I used to pay Blockbuster? No thanks.
    - brewdad 5y ago
      Blockbuster new releases were $3 in 1990 dollars ($6.60 today). This was in a mid-sized town in the midwest, not Manhattan or LA. Blockbuster was also far less convenient.