24 ms·

"If I could actually buy movies and TV shows for download I would" I wouldn't for one simple reason: the canon of classic cinema that one needs to watch and re

"If I could actually buy movies and TV shows for download I would" I wouldn't for one simple reason: the canon of classic cinema that one needs to watch and rewatch in order to have a solid knowledge of the art form, consists of many hundreds of films. Multiply that by the cost of purchasing individual films, and you arrive at a total cost that even most people in highly paid countries would find unbearable, let alone less fortunate regions of the world. And while some very lucky people might have access to public libraries that can supply rips, you can't expect the rest of the planet to go without culture, so torrenting it is, just like how Anna's Archive and LibGen have opened literature still under copyright to all.

petertodd 2y ago
In the VHS and DVD days it was common for people to have large video collections that cost them thousands of dollars to obtain; as I said, I personally have probably spent a few thousand on music in my lifetime. Artists - and even movie studios - do deserve to get paid. I have no qualms with paying them so long as the arrangement is reasonable. Paying for downloads that I actually own is reasonable; streaming is not. As for everyone else... I could pirate my music too. But I don't because I can afford it, so I should pay for it.
mazambazz 2y ago
Agreed completely, and you touch upon something very poignant. Those living in poverty already fall short of fulfilling their hierarchy of needs in many ways. They certainly do not have the money to access film and media, so it's not like the production company is losing out on sales. Do we really want to take the position of putting forth a monetary requirement for cultural enrichment (by condemning piracy)? It isn't like stealing someone's movie or concert ticket, where it deprives someone else of their enjoyment. It's a societal net-positive in all regards. When it comes to mediums of knowledge such as books, the argument becomes even stronger. There are so many books that are either exorbitantly priced or just completely unavailable. We live in an age where we can send robots to other planets, create AIs that beat the Turing Test, and communicate with (almost) the entirety of the global population from a small rectangle in our pockets--but you're telling me I can't read this book because either I don't have $200 or because there's only 10 physical copies and they're all rented out? The hill that knowledge and information should be accessible to everyone is the hill I'm willing to die on.
- meiraleal 2y ago
  Isn't it interesting how the advertising monetization model didn't take over movies the same way Google took over TV, newspapers, etc. with free services? Like how a movie could be full of advertisements like cars, restaurants, tech and then be distributed for free

petertodd 2y ago

In the VHS and DVD days it was common for people to have large video collections that cost them thousands of dollars to obtain; as I said, I personally have probably spent a few thousand on music in my lifetime. Artists - and even movie studios - do deserve to get paid. I have no qualms with paying them so long as the arrangement is reasonable. Paying for downloads that I actually own is reasonable; streaming is not. As for everyone else... I could pirate my music too. But I don't because I can afford it, so I should pay for it.

mazambazz 2y ago

Agreed completely, and you touch upon something very poignant. Those living in poverty already fall short of fulfilling their hierarchy of needs in many ways. They certainly do not have the money to access film and media, so it's not like the production company is losing out on sales. Do we really want to take the position of putting forth a monetary requirement for cultural enrichment (by condemning piracy)? It isn't like stealing someone's movie or concert ticket, where it deprives someone else of their enjoyment. It's a societal net-positive in all regards. When it comes to mediums of knowledge such as books, the argument becomes even stronger. There are so many books that are either exorbitantly priced or just completely unavailable. We live in an age where we can send robots to other planets, create AIs that beat the Turing Test, and communicate with (almost) the entirety of the global population from a small rectangle in our pockets--but you're telling me I can't read this book because either I don't have $200 or because there's only 10 physical copies and they're all rented out? The hill that knowledge and information should be accessible to everyone is the hill I'm willing to die on.

meiraleal 2y ago
Isn't it interesting how the advertising monetization model didn't take over movies the same way Google took over TV, newspapers, etc. with free services? Like how a movie could be full of advertisements like cars, restaurants, tech and then be distributed for free