dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
82

pende_tim
Premium Member
join:2004-01-04
Selbyville, DE

pende_tim

Premium Member

Draconian Caps Next

The next effort the **aa will try is to get the ISPs to institute very heavy caps on use.
If your data is limited, it make it hard to pirate movies. Of course there will be collateral damage to the likes of Netflix, Amazon Prime, YouTube, etc. but al is fair in war, right?

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

tshirt

Premium Member

And the users paying for content from Netflix, Amazon Prime, YouTube, etc. will know who to blame.

buzz_4_20
join:2003-09-20
Dover, NH

buzz_4_20

Member

The ISPs seem quite happy blaming users of those services for "congestion"

Piracy and Streaming both compete with their precious Broadcast TV, caps are coming either way.
Or "Preferred Access" AKA Raising rates on Internet and Netflix ETC.

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

1 recommendation

tshirt

Premium Member

said by buzz_4_20:

Piracy and Streaming both compete with their precious Broadcast TV, caps are coming either way.

Piracy doesn't "COMPETE", it is not a authorized service or product, it is unlawful conversion.

Netflix et al type services legitimately repackage content made for television and movie customers.

the ISP is rightfully charging more, in return for delivering more personalized bits.
Piracy does not contribute towards or benefit the continuing production of content in any way.
said by pende_tim:

but al is fair in war, right?

Contrary to pirate legend, you aren't heroes of any "war", just cheapskate scumbags, still and minor percentage of total viewer and won't be missed by anyone.
Your actions DISADVANTAGE all legit content users.

buzz_4_20
join:2003-09-20
Dover, NH

buzz_4_20

Member

Regardless if Piracy is legal or not, it's where some of those eyeballs are turning, without ADS even.
It's been shown that easily accessed fairly priced content drops piracy rates.

TechyDad
Premium Member
join:2001-07-13
USA

TechyDad to pende_tim

Premium Member

to pende_tim
Given that many ISPs are cable TV providers, this isn't a bug, it's a feature. Killing Netflix, Amazon Prime, YouTube, etc means that people would need to turn to Cable TV for more video programming and fewer people would cut the cord. It's a win-win for the **AA and cable companies.
TechyDad

2 recommendations

TechyDad to tshirt

Premium Member

to tshirt
I'll agree that piracy is unlawful, but it actually does wind up competing. Obviously, not on price, since there's no way the studios would release everything for free. However, it does compete on availability.

As you make content available for fair prices legally, piracy drops. As you raise the price of content to unreasonable levels or put unfair restrictions on viewing of the content, piracy rises.

The Oatmeal put it best in this comic: »theoatmeal.com/comics/ga ··· _thrones

So studios could compete with piracy by letting Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc make the shows available to subscribers online. (Either via all-you-can-watch subscription services or via pay-per-episode services.) Studios treat Netflix like a threat, but they are actually their single best ally in the fight against piracy.

shirter
@prj.hu

shirter to tshirt

Anon

to tshirt
I am not watching any of these stupid movies or shows. They are dumb replica of the same dumb old superman story anyway. Personally I think the era of getting profit out of bullshit content is coming to an end. That's why parasites are trying to grab on to any dime they think they can grab. Very simple - people are tired of bullshit. There are other things in life then staring at TV set getting your brain reprogrammed.
millerja01a
join:2005-10-03
Durham, NC

millerja01a to TechyDad

Member

to TechyDad
Loved the cartoon. You're right, it sums it up beautifully. No wonder GoT is one of the most pirated shows.
millerja01a

millerja01a to tshirt

Member

to tshirt
tshirt, content providers need to make the shows and movies available at a price the consumer feels is a value. Pirating is growing because the consumer doesn't agree with the current market price for content.

On top of that, torrents for highly shared content means you can have a 1080p movie over most cable speeds in under 30mins. The clients are very easy to use and the trackers make it very easy to find what you're looking for.

The market is clearly speaking what it wants. The content providers are fighting against the market. They will lose.

SmilingBob
join:2013-09-23
League City, TX

SmilingBob to tshirt

Member

to tshirt
said by tshirt :

Your actions DISADVANTAGE all legit content users.

Although I agree downloading movies you did not pay for is wrong, the law goes further by making it illegal to even make backup copies of the Blurays and DVDs you own. If one make copies of legally purchased discs for personal use ( i.e. PLEX to stream to multiple ROKUs throughout the home, DVD copies for the SUV when driving the kids, MP4 files onto the tablets, etc.) - does this also make someone a non-legit content user?

According to the DMCA it does indeed. I realize we're talking torrenting here, but there are plenty of uses for legally purchased discs that do not include giving them away for free via torrent but are still considered illegal. I am not making excuses for pirates, but I could see making the case for someone torrenting who wanted a digital file of a movie they had already paid for if they did not have the knowledge or expertise in ripping their disc collection themselves. The MPAA expects you to buy the same movie multiple times in multiple formats. Um, sure. The idiotic IP laws need to change to reflect the already established personal use case law. Until then, I guess it is "ARRRRRR MATEY!"
Bengie25
join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI

Bengie25 to tshirt

Member

to tshirt
Science has shown the opposite is true. Please back up your statements with science that is not sponsored with any amount of money from content providers.

Time and time again, they have shown sales increase after piracy increases and sales even decrease after piracy decreases.

Piracy is also known as free advertisement. On average, people who pirate the most, spend the most.

But you're just trolling because no one with a bit of background on the subject could come to the conclusion that non-commercial piracy is bad on average.

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

tshirt to millerja01a

Premium Member

to millerja01a
said by millerja01a:

...

Your choice is to say "I won't buy at that price, under those conditions" and they either keep the price for a limited market, or change the price and conditions for use.

In NO other transaction or industry would anyone consider it a normal sale for the buyer to say "I don't like the deal, I'll just take the product free."
Nobody would find it acceptable to do it in a restaurant, a hotel, at the theater, or to an airline.
said by millerja01a:

The market is clearly speaking what it wants. The content providers are fighting against the market. They will lose.

So the pirate "market"* wants free, and the ability to trade or resell it as they please..?

The line is drawn, the content providers now MUST fight to the last man, OR go out of business.
tshirt

tshirt to Bengie25

Premium Member

to Bengie25
said by Bengie25:

Time and time again, they have shown sales increase after piracy increases and sales even decrease after piracy decreases.

Piracy is also known as free advertisement. On average, people who pirate the most, spend the most.

And that's bullshit! Ever thread some idiot says "it's been shown..." and NO actual scientific study is ever revealed.
IF it were TRUE, why would Karl do all the stories about the increasing piracy damaging the industry, and poster after poster claim they are driving the industry out of business?
That doesn't sound like most believe that piracy is beneficial to anyone, but those not paying.
The current marketing and pricing of content may be outrageous (I'm not defending that) but the people in content industry aren't stupid, and would go with a model closer to what people here are suggesting IF it provided anywhere near the same bottom line.

El Quintron
Cancel Culture Ambassador
Premium Member
join:2008-04-28
Tronna

El Quintron to tshirt

Premium Member

to tshirt
said by tshirt:

In NO other transaction or industry would anyone consider it a normal sale for the buyer to say "I don't like the deal, I'll just take the product free."
Nobody would find it acceptable to do it in a restaurant, a hotel, at the theater, or to an airline.

Except that in this case no physical good is taken, and no space is occupied that would otherwise be occupied by a paying customer.

There's a reason why it's called copyright infringement and not theft, because what you're doing is making an unauthorized copy, you're not stealing an actual good or service.

We can discuss the merits of IP laws all day long, but comparing to theft is simply disingenuous.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926

Member

It is theft, and if you worked in the entertainment industry, you would agree. Now go infringe on something you would have paid for otherwise.

El Quintron
Cancel Culture Ambassador
Premium Member
join:2008-04-28
Tronna

El Quintron

Premium Member

said by ITALIAN926:

It is theft, and if you worked in the entertainment industry, you would agree.

I have worked in the entertainment industry in both independent and corporate productions, which is why I have a more nuanced view of the subject matter. Do you have anything useful to say other than "I'm butthurt because the pirates stole my cookies?"

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

tshirt to El Quintron

Premium Member

to El Quintron
said by El Quintron:

Except that in this case no physical good is taken,

It is still their product, and if unused/not paid for when used the owner is still out funds due for it's use.
As I said it is legit not to use the product and the business can adjust their business size to meet PAYING customer demand.
I didn't use the word theft, because I don't want the whole semantics battle, but the effect is similar.
dra6o0n
join:2011-08-15
Mississauga, ON

dra6o0n to ITALIAN926

Member

to ITALIAN926
You do know that people can refuse to pay their credit cards, then stop relying on them and the bank, and all they get is a bad credit rating. Then they wait out 5 years by not using any credit cards and voila, getting a credit card again.

So with that in comparison to piracy, people can refuse to buy something and turn to something else. It's a choice. And they'll do it to spite you if they wanted to.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926 to El Quintron

Member

to El Quintron
Sure you have.

El Quintron
Cancel Culture Ambassador
Premium Member
join:2008-04-28
Tronna

El Quintron to tshirt

Premium Member

to tshirt
said by tshirt:

As I said it is legit not to use the product and the business can adjust their business size to meet PAYING customer demand.

Most piracy is due to market distortion, and lack of availability. The real question you want to ask yourself is what percentage of pirates would pay, and under what circumstances.

I'll give you a real world example:

My friend was working and travelling and wanted to purchase Breaking Bad legitimately due to staying a friends houses, and not wanting to use other people's connections for piracy.

In Canada his only option was iTunes and he was using an Ubuntu laptop, after two missed episodes due to trying to get it to work with WINE he cancelled his season pass, renewed his Usenet sub and that was that.
El Quintron

El Quintron to ITALIAN926

Premium Member

to ITALIAN926
Five years, what about you?

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

tshirt to El Quintron

Premium Member

to El Quintron
said by El Quintron:

Most piracy is due to market distortion, and lack of availability.

Or a feeling of entitlement/self-importance.
said by El Quintron:

In Canada his only option was iTunes and he was using an Ubuntu laptop,

So it wasn't "UNAVAILABLE" it was his crappy hardware/poor choice of O/S?

Again I question his RIGHT to the show unpaid for.
said by El Quintron:

The real question you want to ask yourself is what percentage of pirates would pay, and under what circumstances.

consider that pirates are a very small percentage of the world audience and that even if 50% paid for it later(I'm guessing closer to 3%) it's not a drop in the bucket compared to legit user income which is what they are working so hard to protect.

El Quintron
Cancel Culture Ambassador
Premium Member
join:2008-04-28
Tronna

El Quintron

Premium Member

said by tshirt:

So it wasn't "UNAVAILABLE" it was his crappy hardware/poor choice of O/S?

Again I question his RIGHT to the show unpaid for.

Speaking of entitlement... your comment typifies industry thinking and why piracy continues to be a viable option for many.

iTunes IMO is a poor choice of distribution method, and if you want to make an apples to oranges comparison, iTunes is a poorer distribution system than Ubuntu is an OS.

Now that I have that off my chest, providing the episodes via some type of streaming service would be OS-neutral and done the job just as adequately, and well created a paying customer in the process, but oh well.

EQ
millerja01a
join:2005-10-03
Durham, NC

millerja01a to tshirt

Member

to tshirt
Take off your Braveheart facepaint and actually read what I said.

The market is slowly turning to piracy because the existing prices are too high. Pirating is a form of protest. As a lot of data shows, when content is available at a price the market likes, the market will pay for it.

The fact that cord cutting is increasing is a clear sign the market DOESN'T like the current pricing or choices and is responding with it's proverbial wallet.

This is a very slow collapse of the current pricing model.

ITALIAN926
join:2003-08-16

ITALIAN926

Member

quote:
Pirating is a form of protest.
LOL

Funniest thing Ive read today, thanks.