Researchers Aim To Reduce Copyright Infringement False Positives > So THAT explains it

So THAT explains it

There are many legit purposes to use torrents, no question about that. I have no problem downloading a movie that I already paid for as to save time in transferring to our server so we can pull it up on demand via XBOX or now Media Manager and I have downloaded old hard to get stuff on random impulse such as Bionic Woman episodes.

The article here is correct though, torrent users are likely to spend much more on DVD, Blu and so forth.

Hollywood has a flawed business model in they think they can control how people use media and they want to profit - over and over again for work already paid for. It is the only business that expects to be paid for a job already done - over and over. Imagine if I charged a customer each year a royalty fee for the work I performed and was paid for a year ago? It is a joke.

I think a law should be made in that movies and music as well as old software, educational works and so forth after 10 years be madepublic domain. The future is freedom of information - on demand research an so forth. I understand the need to make money and pay those that make these things but after 10 years of profit - the money has been made. It's time to adjust change things in the 21st century now - or like a crappy sci-fi flick we will find a future were one big "media" corporation controls everything - your communications, what you read or watch on the news, how you watch and what content is available for watching and if you wavier they will call the Internet police and put you in a corporate owned prison (wait, the US already has those ..... )

It's time for Hollywood and their extortion to end - OMG - actors may actually have to work for their money instead of living lives as if they are worth the ridiculous money they are paid and time to prohibit Internet providers from owning content providers and news agencies, etc.

They aren't the only ones, the music industry tried this for a long time. They STILL seem to think it's good business practice to sue your fans for punitive damages...

I think the biggest problem is they have tremendous capital invested in an outdated delivery mechanism (be it dvd, cd, vhs, or whatever else has been replaced) and don't want to invest more in new tech to keep pace, so they sue to prevent it. It's like trying to stop the sun from setting (actually more like trying to un-invent the atomic bomb) but they still try it.

Some are learning - look what happened with online music distribution. Someone finally took the initiative and it exploded. Sure, music piracy still happens, but if you provide a reasonably priced and unambiguously legal means of obtaining something via the newest available technology, the positive PR offsets the losses from outdated technology, if they play it right.

Fighting piracy always made me think how silly it would be if a newspaper went around town policing offices and suing anyone who read a paper purchased by someone else. Granted, newspapers are dying off (another outdated distribution model) but would they be any better if they were suing people for 'sharing'? At least people don't think of the local paper with disdain the way many view the RIAA, and some are seeing some success with online models