Torrent Talk (2 Viewers)

[drummer]

Hardly much value in a digital file because it really isn't a tangible item.

I'd argue it's more valuable, not less. If I have a film on a flaswh drive, I can play it on my computer, my PlayStation, I can add the file to my phone, and I can e-mail it to anyone. Not true with a DVD.

And you can accidentally or by choice delete it too. So can they. Or they can chose to delete it. Or not download it off of the e-mail.

Most DVD's have more choice like extra audio tracks too. There are a lot of things DVD's have more than a file does, such as packaging, which makes the DVD's more valuable because of that tangibility.

 

[drummer]

BTW, should a person pay Hollywood for having a DVD party with several friends invited over? That might fall under illegal distribution.

anyone who does this isa filthy thief.

It's a GO DIRECTLY TO JAIL party!

 

[drummer]

For those who downloaded The Hobbit, here is the damage you created:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0903624/business?ref_=tt_dt_bus

 

[drummer]

BTW, Up In Smoke's grosses of 1978:

The film was a huge success, earning $44,364,244 at the domestic box office,[1] making it the 15th highest grossing film of 1978.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Up_in_Smoke

 

[Pots]

What people don't understand that most digital media is disposable. These aren't old tape and optical mediums. I can delete a file as fast as I can obtain it. Hardly much value in a digital file because it really isn't a tangible item.

Who doesnt understand that? The issue isnt the value of the copy, but the lost revenue to the creator/author of the work who has a monopoly under our law on exploitation of their work. You have the practical ability to circumvent that monopoly based upon current technology but it doesnt change the fact that you are taking potential money from the creator/author regardless of whether your sole copy or any single tangible copy has any or more or less value, whether it is disposable or not, or whether you keep it or not. And please spare me the "I wouldnt have bought it anyway" or "I buy lots of stuff after I steal them" arguments.

You are completely ignoring or just dont care about the purpose and spirit of copyright law. Which is fine. But it is our law.

I'm sure a .avi file of Up In Smoke has cost Tommy Chong lost revenue, even though that movie has made it's $$$ a thousand times over since release before the internet. Even after it was copied onto VHS off of the early days of cable TV.

What's good about digital: it doesn't degrade after multiple copies, like your old tape of a John Holmes pron movie you got from a college buddy.

If you dont like our laws, change them. Dont just violate them and then claim it is justified it because you dont like them, or who they benefit, or how they benefit them.

Legalize it TM

 

[drummer]

BTW, there is absolutely zero value in a digital file as far a collect ability. Not like say a collector's edition of a DVD, with all the bells and whistles and the added value within packaging.

If a file is produced in mass, then it's value degrades.

 

[drummer]

What people don't understand that most digital media is disposable. These aren't old tape and optical mediums. I can delete a file as fast as I can obtain it. Hardly much value in a digital file because it really isn't a tangible item.

Who doesnt understand that? The issue isnt the value of the copy, but the lost revenue to the creator/author of the work who has a monopoly under our law on exploitation of their work. You have the practical ability to circumvent that monopoly based upon current technology but it doesnt change the fact that you are taking potential money from the creator/author regardless of whether your sole copy or any single tangible copy has any or more or less value, whether it is disposable or not, or whether you keep it or not. And please spare me the "I wouldnt have bought it anyway" or "I buy lots of stuff after I steal them" arguments.

You are completely ignoring or just dont care about the purpose and spirit of copyright law. Which is fine. But it is our law.

I'm sure a .avi file of Up In Smoke has cost Tommy Chong lost revenue, even though that movie has made it's $$$ a thousand times over since release before the internet. Even after it was copied onto VHS off of the early days of cable TV.

What's good about digital: it doesn't degrade after multiple copies, like your old tape of a John Holmes pron movie you got from a college buddy.

If you dont like our laws, change them. Dont just violate them and then claim it is justified it because you dont like them, or who they benefit, or how they benefit them.

Legalize it TM

Or ban technology like Handbrake and even Windows Media Player.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Hardly much value in a digital file because it really isn't a tangible item.

I'd argue it's more valuable, not less. If I have a film on a flaswh drive, I can play it on my computer, my PlayStation, I can add the file to my phone, and I can e-mail it to anyone. Not true with a DVD.

And you can accidentally or by choice delete it too. So can they. Or they can chose to delete it. Or not download it off of the e-mail.

Most DVD's have more choice like extra audio tracks too. There are a lot of things DVD's have more than a file does, such as packaging, which makes the DVD's more valuable because of that tangibility.

You can snap a DVD in half or scratch it, as well. I'm no expert on ripping, but I am fairly certain that extra audio tracks can be ripped as well.

 

[Amused to Death]

Right now, I have several classic ZZ Top albums saved as favorites on Youtube that I can play any time I want, even on my cell phone. I can also record those files directly from Youtube to .wav on my hard drive, split it into tracks with free, legal software, and burn cds or convert to mp3s. All legally (as far as I know). But if I use a bittorrent client to get the same thing, I'm infringing on a copyright.

Seems like a disconnect to me.

 

[jdoggydogg]

BTW, there is absolutely zero value in a digital file as far a collect ability. Not like say a collector's edition of a DVD, with all the bells and whistles and the added value within packaging.

I know what you're saying. But I have a few choice collector's DVDs and BluRays, and all I care about is the film. The booklets and art are cool, but they aren't important to me.

 

[drummer]

Hardly much value in a digital file because it really isn't a tangible item.

I'd argue it's more valuable, not less. If I have a film on a flaswh drive, I can play it on my computer, my PlayStation, I can add the file to my phone, and I can e-mail it to anyone. Not true with a DVD.

And you can accidentally or by choice delete it too. So can they. Or they can chose to delete it. Or not download it off of the e-mail.

Most DVD's have more choice like extra audio tracks too. There are a lot of things DVD's have more than a file does, such as packaging, which makes the DVD's more valuable because of that tangibility.

You can snap a DVD in half or scratch it, as well. I'm no expert on ripping, but I am fairly certain that extra audio tracks can be ripped as well.

It depends on the format and the encoding, but most don't, and maybe they add some subtitles in there. The thing is, unless you download the file as an image, you don't get the exact same copy as the original.

 

[drummer]

BTW, there is absolutely zero value in a digital file as far a collect ability. Not like say a collector's edition of a DVD, with all the bells and whistles and the added value within packaging.

I know what you're saying. But I have a few choice collector's DVDs and BluRays, and all I care about is the film. The booklets and art are cool, but they aren't important to me.

But the packaging is added value, value you don't get with a file that is downloaded. Also, there are a lot of files out there than you can't find anywhere within a "legitimate" marketplace. You also have more control of the medium itself, rather than have to use technology like iTunes and such.

I would dare say more media is exposed to more people via file sharing than they would be in more traditional delivery systems. The argument really should be whether anybody would pay to watch or listen to the content in the first place. If someone can download something for free and it's easily disposable, then it's really a one use item. Of course, a better delivery system where they don't have to download it and stream it instead is becoming more popular.

 

[jdoggydogg]

BTW, there is absolutely zero value in a digital file as far a collect ability. Not like say a collector's edition of a DVD, with all the bells and whistles and the added value within packaging.

I know what you're saying. But I have a few choice collector's DVDs and BluRays, and all I care about is the film. The booklets and art are cool, but they aren't important to me.

But the packaging is added value, value you don't get with a file that is downloaded. Also, there are a lot of files out there than you can't find anywhere within a "legitimate" marketplace. You also have more control of the medium itself, rather than have to use technology like iTunes and such.

I would dare say more media is exposed to more people via file sharing than they would be in more traditional delivery systems. The argument really should be whether anybody would pay to watch or listen to the content in the first place. If someone can download something for free and it's easily disposable, then it's really a one use item. Of course, a better delivery system where they don't have to download it and stream it instead is becoming more popular.

I think Netflix streaming is imperfect - mainly because they don't have a lot of major films in the collection and there's no HBO. But even with those limitations, the service proves that consumers will pay for movies if the interface is easy and cheap.

 

[drummer]

BTW, there is absolutely zero value in a digital file as far a collect ability. Not like say a collector's edition of a DVD, with all the bells and whistles and the added value within packaging.

I know what you're saying. But I have a few choice collector's DVDs and BluRays, and all I care about is the film. The booklets and art are cool, but they aren't important to me.

But the packaging is added value, value you don't get with a file that is downloaded. Also, there are a lot of files out there than you can't find anywhere within a "legitimate" marketplace. You also have more control of the medium itself, rather than have to use technology like iTunes and such.

I would dare say more media is exposed to more people via file sharing than they would be in more traditional delivery systems. The argument really should be whether anybody would pay to watch or listen to the content in the first place. If someone can download something for free and it's easily disposable, then it's really a one use item. Of course, a better delivery system where they don't have to download it and stream it instead is becoming more popular.

I think Netflix streaming is imperfect - mainly because they don't have a lot of major films in the collection and there's no HBO. But even with those limitations, the service proves that consumers will pay for movies if the interface is easy and cheap.

It's a great delivery system that helps smaller and foreign movies that may or may not have made any money out there on screens get seen for only 10 bucks a month. I'm sure it helps the "straight to DVD" market, mostly because there are no rental places anymore to speak of. Seriously, a low budget flick can only make so much money if it's not a indie that got Sundance all erect.

 

[Chaka]

I would like to hear more about these evil bastards of this "Hollywood" conglomerate.

I would like to hear ways that I can do to financial companies like Goldman Sachs what torrent nerds are doing to Hollywood.

I am with you there, only you would really go to jail if you stole from them.

Yet none of them went to jail for collapsing our economy while still making a fortune for themselves.

Sad but true.

I know Hollywood isn't Wall Street but I understand the mindset of being okay with taking something from an entity so big as Paramount, Warner, Disney etc. I think most people feel that, if given the opportunity, any of those companies would not hesitate to steal from the consumer (and in many ways they do).

 

[drummer]

I would like to hear more about these evil bastards of this "Hollywood" conglomerate.

I would like to hear ways that I can do to financial companies like Goldman Sachs what torrent nerds are doing to Hollywood.

I am with you there, only you would really go to jail if you stole from them.

Yet none of them went to jail for collapsing our economy while still making a fortune for themselves.

Sad but true.

I know Hollywood isn't Wall Street but I understand the mindset of being okay with taking something from an entity so big as Paramount, Warner, Disney etc. I think most people feel that, if given the opportunity, any of those companies would not hesitate to steal from the consumer (and in many ways they do).

Instead of innovating, they would rather screw up the system with laws like SOPA or inflate the value of the content. Reboots and multiple sequels isn't innovation. It's just trying to pile on more cash like they were video games, which have more value to the end user.

 

[Todd Andrews]

I would like to hear more about these evil bastards of this "Hollywood" conglomerate.

I would like to hear ways that I can do to financial companies like Goldman Sachs what torrent nerds are doing to Hollywood.

I am with you there, only you would really go to jail if you stole from them.

Yet none of them went to jail for collapsing our economy while still making a fortune for themselves.

Sad but true.

I know Hollywood isn't Wall Street but I understand the mindset of being okay with taking something from an entity so big as Paramount, Warner, Disney etc. I think most people feel that, if given the opportunity, any of those companies would not hesitate to steal from the consumer (and in many ways they do).

Instead of innovating, they would rather screw up the system with laws like SOPA or inflate the value of the content. Reboots and multiple sequels isn't innovation. It's just trying to pile on more cash like they were video games, which have more value to the end user.

So dont buy them. But just because you disapprove of these companies business models and creative content doesnt mean you can steal it.

 

[drummer]

I would like to hear more about these evil bastards of this "Hollywood" conglomerate.

I would like to hear ways that I can do to financial companies like Goldman Sachs what torrent nerds are doing to Hollywood.

I am with you there, only you would really go to jail if you stole from them.

Yet none of them went to jail for collapsing our economy while still making a fortune for themselves.

Sad but true.

I know Hollywood isn't Wall Street but I understand the mindset of being okay with taking something from an entity so big as Paramount, Warner, Disney etc. I think most people feel that, if given the opportunity, any of those companies would not hesitate to steal from the consumer (and in many ways they do).

Instead of innovating, they would rather screw up the system with laws like SOPA or inflate the value of the content. Reboots and multiple sequels isn't innovation. It's just trying to pile on more cash like they were video games, which have more value to the end user.

So dont buy them. But just because you disapprove of these companies business models and creative content doesnt mean you can steal it.

When they put the actual value of what the end user is stealing, you may have a real argument. Since they can't, they'd rather go to Congress to screw up something they didn't even create themselves.

 

[Otis]

BTW, should a person pay Hollywood for having a DVD party with several friends invited over? That might fall under illegal distribution.

No need because Hollywood is crooked imo

 

[drummer]

BTW, should a person pay Hollywood for having a DVD party with several friends invited over? That might fall under illegal distribution.

No need because Hollywood is crooked imo

Not only crooked, but evil:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1702443/

 

[Maelstrom]

.

 

[culdeus]

Just want to throw it out that pandora pays out $0.0002 per song listen. They drive 10%ish of the total music impressions in this country.

But yeah. The lost revenue from torrenting music is awful.

 

[Otis]

Just want to throw it out that pandora pays out $0.0002 per song listen. They drive 10%ish of the total music impressions in this country.

But yeah. The lost revenue from torrenting music is awful.

I don't get it.

 

[drummer]

Just want to throw it out that pandora pays out $0.0002 per song listen. They drive 10%ish of the total music impressions in this country.

But yeah. The lost revenue from torrenting music is awful.

I don't get it.

It's about time you admit to it.

 

[drummer]

BTW, if we had to place value on Otis' schtick, my guess it's BBS via Usenet. Something like alt.usenet.fratboy.

 

[culdeus]

Just want to throw it out that pandora pays out $0.0002 per song listen. They drive 10%ish of the total music impressions in this country.

But yeah. The lost revenue from torrenting music is awful.

I don't get it.

You are greatly exaggerating the value of digital content. By extreme orders of magnitude. The value is and always has been in the distribution.

At the pandora rate a movie is still only pennies on the dollar.

What you don't see is torrents honestly bring in revenue. Did you watch what happened to digital music after spotify and pandora took over? Total revenue is dropping now. It wasn't people stealing stuff it was people like me switching to an easy and damn near free service from a free one.

Movie shops don't give a crap about torrents because they know their model will fall the same way. The next battle isn't over lost revenue to artists it's over how to charge for the bandwidth people use to kill their golden goose.

Movie shops can't go the pandora route. They know this. It took them awhile but they got there.

But keep fighting the good fight of revenue. Because everyone who knows anything knows what lies on the other side of this.

 

[Zasada]

Maybe I'm old school, but I still buy my music from Amazon. I used to pirate it, but once there was an option to easily buy DRM-free tracks, I became law-abiding. The irony is that I don't hate DRM because it keeps me from sharing with other people, I hate it because it keeps me from sharing with myself. I just want to be able to move the song around various devices or stream from my personal cloud.

When it comes to movies, most "digital copy" options you can purchase today are:

• much worse quality than what I can pirate and/or encode myself using Handbrake,
• not compatible with each/all of my devices (PC, android phone, android tablet, Mac); and
• dependent on a connection to their authentication server to play (pretty hard when you're on a plane, unless you have WiFi).

Give me a product like Amazon's MP3 store, but for movies, and I'm onboard. I'll become an honest consumer again.

Is piracy stealing? No. Against copyright law? Yup. But that's not really what OP meant by "stealing". OP should have asked if it was "wrong" or "illegal".

Many pirate simply because piracy provides a better product which is more conveniently obtained. "Free" isn't the critical element. The industry needs to create a product that is easy and flexible, and many people will stop pirating. Conversely, the industry could spend billions trying to enforce existing copyright law (good luck with that). Unless the industry succeeds with one of those two approaches, it's dead (or much smaller than it is today). The world has changed and the industry needs to change with it.

My two cents.

 

[Otis]

Just want to throw it out that pandora pays out $0.0002 per song listen. They drive 10%ish of the total music impressions in this country.

But yeah. The lost revenue from torrenting music is awful.

I don't get it.

You are greatly exaggerating the value of digital content. By extreme orders of magnitude. The value is and always has been in the distribution. At the pandora rate a movie is still only pennies on the dollar.

What you don't see is torrents honestly bring in revenue. Did you watch what happened to digital music after spotify and pandora took over? Total revenue is dropping now. It wasn't people stealing stuff it was people like me switching to an easy and damn near free service from a free one.

Movie shops don't give a crap about torrents because they know their model will fall the same way. The next battle isn't over lost revenue to artists it's over how to charge for the bandwidth people use to kill their golden goose.

Movie shops can't go the pandora route. They know this. It took them awhile but they got there.

But keep fighting the good fight of revenue. Because everyone who knows anything knows what lies on the other side of this.

I don't think I was fighting any fight of revenue, was I?

 

[[icon]]

Oh... and quit ####### trying to charge physical distribution prices for digital files, #######s.

CD PRICE : $12.99

Of that price... $5-6 covers retail overhead manufacturing and distribution. That doesn't exist with digital sales.

Digital movies should be $10

Digital Albums should be $5-7

 

[culdeus]

Oh... and quit ####### trying to charge physical distribution prices for digital files, #######s.

CD PRICE : $12.99

Of that price... $5-6 covers retail overhead manufacturing and distribution. That doesn't exist with digital sales.

Digital movies should be $10

Digital Albums should be $5-7

What are you basing this on?

Movies shouldn't be valued more than a buck. Albums maybe 10 cents.

Spotify and netflix totally demolished the revenue model. It's simply not possible to demand that sort of pricing for digital copies when all you can eat music is under 10 a month and free on ads

 

[drummer]

Just want to throw it out that pandora pays out $0.0002 per song listen. They drive 10%ish of the total music impressions in this country.

But yeah. The lost revenue from torrenting music is awful.

I don't get it.

You are greatly exaggerating the value of digital content. By extreme orders of magnitude. The value is and always has been in the distribution.At the pandora rate a movie is still only pennies on the dollar.

What you don't see is torrents honestly bring in revenue. Did you watch what happened to digital music after spotify and pandora took over? Total revenue is dropping now. It wasn't people stealing stuff it was people like me switching to an easy and damn near free service from a free one.

Movie shops don't give a crap about torrents because they know their model will fall the same way. The next battle isn't over lost revenue to artists it's over how to charge for the bandwidth people use to kill their golden goose.

Movie shops can't go the pandora route. They know this. It took them awhile but they got there.

But keep fighting the good fight of revenue. Because everyone who knows anything knows what lies on the other side of this.

I don't think I was fighting any fight of revenue, was I?

No, you were just posting horrid schtick.

 

[Sinn Fein]

I am not going to get into a pissing match over pricing - because I generally agree that digital media is overpriced - but when you have a non-commodity product, you don't set price based on costs.

Music, movies, books, etc are almost by definition not commodities. You can make a slim argument that all music of a certain genre is similar enough to be considered a commodity, but really people who buy music are buying specific content - not simply genres.

So, you charge what the market will bear.

Now, this is where it gets interesting and where the ability to get the content cheaper is a factor. Ultimately this has been a huge money grab by the entertainment industry - but I think market forces will eventually drive the prices down where most people would buy/rent a legit on-line version rather than find a pirated source.

I think the media industry in general is in for a period of upheaval as it discovers new distribution platforms, and it will take a little while for it all to shake out.

 

[Todd Andrews]

I am not going to get into a pissing match over pricing - because I generally agree that digital media is overpriced - but when you have a non-commodity product, you don't set price based on costs.

Music, movies, books, etc are almost by definition not commodities. You can make a slim argument that all music of a certain genre is similar enough to be considered a commodity, but really people who buy music are buying specific content - not simply genres.

So, you charge what the market will bear.

Now, this is where it gets interesting and where the ability to get the content cheaper is a factor. Ultimately this has been a huge money grab by the entertainment industry - but I think market forces will eventually drive the prices down where most people would buy/rent a legit on-line version rather than find a pirated source.

I think the media industry in general is in for a period of upheaval as it discovers new distribution platforms, and it will take a little while for it all to shake out.

Media industries have been in a massive upheaval for more than a decade. Huge revenue drains from music, publishing, TV/film, illustration/commercial two dimensions art, etc., have already occurred and are still occurring. Part of that has to do with the issues in the overall economy of the last 5-10 years, but a great deal has to do with changing technology, business model upheaval and failure to innovate, and lack of control over distribution.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Anti-pirating ad music stolen

 

[Johnnymac]

So what is the best torrent client and best site for downloading these days?

 

[mquinnjr]

So what is the best torrent client and best site for downloading these days?

Big fan of uTorrent as the client and torrentz dot eu as a search engine, which aggregates The Pirate Bay along with other torrent hosting sites into its search results.

 

[Johnnymac]

So what is the best torrent client and best site for downloading these days?

Big fan of uTorrent as the client and torrentz dot eu as a search engine, which aggregates The Pirate Bay along with other torrent hosting sites into its search results.

Ok, thanks for the info

 

[VA703]

that is the same I do as well.. spot on

 

[mquinnjr]

OK, so for recommending uTorrent, gents. Apparently, the latest update in the EULA "authorizes" your PC to mine for Bitcoin: http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/latest-version-of-utorrent-installs-cryptocoin-mining-malware.454414698/

Sorry, couldn't find a non-forum webpage to link on this. But, beware.

ETA: A reddit thread with lots of good info on this: http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/2y4lar/popular_torrenting_software_%C2%B5torrent_has_included/

 

[Jack White]

Oh... and quit ####### trying to charge physical distribution prices for digital files, #######s.

CD PRICE : $12.99

Of that price... $5-6 covers retail overhead manufacturing and distribution. That doesn't exist with digital sales.

Digital movies should be $10

Digital Albums should be $5-7

Anytime you use the word "should" without the word "I" in front of it, you're veering off track.

As far as prices go, the market determines that.

 

[tonydead]

What's the thread all about now?

 

[tonydead]

OK, so for recommending uTorrent, gents. Apparently, the latest update in the EULA "authorizes" your PC to mine for Bitcoin: http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/latest-version-of-utorrent-installs-cryptocoin-mining-malware.454414698/

Sorry, couldn't find a non-forum webpage to link on this. But, beware.

ETA: A reddit thread with lots of good info on this: http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/2y4lar/popular_torrenting_software_%C2%B5torrent_has_included/

Thanks, I haven't had the time to mess around with this type of stuff for awhile, since my last last computer rebuild, and ahem had to find some software to do my taxes with. I habitually just installed utorrent. I didn't notice anything unusual during install, I'll have to take a closer look.

 

[Gustavo Fring]

Voted absolutely not stealing, and the main reason that I pirate movies is because it has gotten way too expensive to go to the theatres these days to watch a movie. Ticket prices are about the price of a DVD and after popcorn/drinks you are looking at $50 easy if you take a date.

I pirate all the new movies these days and watch them from the comfort of my couch, own popcorn and drinks for free (excluding minimal food costs). I do it mainly out of convenience, rather than "sticking it to the man".

If these movie production companies setup a way to offer same day availability as theatres on all their movies, for a little higher cost than what they sell the theatres, but lower than movie theatre prices currently that customers pay, I would pay to watch these movies with no problem. This would most likely never happen though, as it would cripple the movie theatre industry, so I guess I'll continue to be a bloody pirate until they find a better solution.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

Right now, I have several classic ZZ Top albums saved as favorites on Youtube that I can play any time I want, even on my cell phone. I can also record those files directly from Youtube to .wav on my hard drive, split it into tracks with free, legal software, and burn cds or convert to mp3s. All legally (as far as I know). But if I use a bittorrent client to get the same thing, I'm infringing on a copyright.

Seems like a disconnect to me.

The point at which you record them and play them back on a device not named youtube is where the illegal part starts. Youtube generates ad revenue and assuming the songs were either uploaded by the band or their label, they are receiving compensation when you play them on youtube.

 

[AAAll-Stars]

You illegally downloading / stealing people are ####### psychopaths.

I can't wait till 3D printers are easily accessible and you justify the printing of iphones, desert eagles, rolexes, etc.

It's amazing how immoral and twisted you all are and how completely you've convinced yourselves that you've done nothing wrong. It's kinda scary really.

Sorry gang, it's IP theft. You're thieves.

 

[AhrnCityPahnder]

update: I just downloaded a car

 

[NutterButter]

You illegally downloading / stealing people are ####### psychopaths.

I can't wait till 3D printers are easily accessible and you justify the printing of iphones, desert eagles, rolexes, etc.

It's amazing how immoral and twisted you all are and how completely you've convinced yourselves that you've done nothing wrong. It's kinda scary really.

Sorry gang, it's IP theft. You're thieves.

I know it is. I need to do some illegal stuff to balance out all the good that I do. Otherwise, I feel like I'm being taken advantage of.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Voted absolutely not stealing, and the main reason that I pirate movies is because it has gotten way too expensive to go to the theatres these days to watch a movie. Ticket prices are about the price of a DVD and after popcorn/drinks you are looking at $50 easy if you take a date.

I pirate all the new movies these days and watch them from the comfort of my couch, own popcorn and drinks for free (excluding minimal food costs). I do it mainly out of convenience, rather than "sticking it to the man".

If these movie production companies setup a way to offer same day availability as theatres on all their movies, for a little higher cost than what they sell the theatres, but lower than movie theatre prices currently that customers pay, I would pay to watch these movies with no problem. This would most likely never happen though, as it would cripple the movie theatre industry, so I guess I'll continue to be a bloody pirate until they find a better solution.

I want X.

X is too expensive.

I am going to utilize technology that allows me to obtain X while not paying for it.

Uh, huh. Keep on telling yourself that is not stealing if it makes you sleep better at night.

 

[AAAll-Stars]

You illegally downloading / stealing people are ####### psychopaths.

I can't wait till 3D printers are easily accessible and you justify the printing of iphones, desert eagles, rolexes, etc.

It's amazing how immoral and twisted you all are and how completely you've convinced yourselves that you've done nothing wrong. It's kinda scary really.

Sorry gang, it's IP theft. You're thieves.

I know it is. I need to do some illegal stuff to balance out all the good that I do. Otherwise, I feel like I'm being taken advantage of.

Stop stealing. Committing immoral behavior allows these major companies to justify ramming through things like SOPA. Are a number of these companies crooks themselves? Sure. But go after them the right way.But on the plus side, at least you're honest about what you're doing. So i respect that.

 

[tonydead]

I suppose none of you made your girl a mix tape back in the day.

Until these thieving whore companies make some changes to their policies I'm not losing any sleep:

1- Purposely having horrid customer service so it's near impossible to get mistakes made on their part corrected.

2- Jacking rates up without notice nor explanation.

3- Remove copy write protection so I can back up and preserve the media I did rightfully purchase

4- Make it playable on all devices and not a limited number of times.

5- Force you to bundle services that you don't need.

6- Force you to pay for upgrades to their system

7- Lies about services they claim to provide.

8- Illegal internet throttling.

9- Not maintaining net centrality.

10- Monopolizing services.

I could go on and on. These are the same companies that spend millions of dollars annually on government relationships to fight and write the laws that keep them taking as much money out of pockets and into theirs as possible. They use piracy as a scapegoat for an industry that has a failing business model because they can't or won't adapt to the changes that technology has given us.