Hulk Smashes Piracy

Look guys:

All of you who say that this guy got what he deserved: Hmmm... I just wonder if ***YOU*** have any skeletons in ***YOUR*** attic?

Look, I can see what is going on here, and if anyone here cannot see it, they are naive, still in childhood, or in some seriously scary state of idiotic denial: These industries have so much financial clout with congress, the courts, and our executive branch (president's cabinet and departments) that they have been pressuring like crazy behind closed doors.

These rich and powerful people have threatened our leader's by pulling back campaign funds, behind the scenes support, and physical threats upon their families (well, it *could* happen). They are angry because so called copyright infringments are world wide and they want to try (inanely, greedy heartless fools that they are) to stop what they could not back in the old days when VHS cameras went into the theater, mimeograph machines copied books, and everyone worldwide was satisfied with cassette tape copies that passed around.

So now, with a vicious thirst, they are attempting to make an example of a handful of humans who aren't really of too much of a kind of mal-intent. I mean, for Heaven's sake: Years of jail all while a President stains the Whitehous carpet with cum, endangering national security, OJ gets off scott free and cocain drug kingpins are murdering hundreds in Columbia all while living perversly lavish here in the States.

Look, I understand that a law might be a law, but these judges are whores to the media industry. The judges and lawyers are the worst and most greedy tyrants of all.

If you have a PVR, Cassette deck, or anything else, and you have EVER EVER copied ANYTHING, and your DARE to jail someone or CLAIM that they got what they deserve, then you are a liar and a bigger crook and hypocrite.

If movies, music, and software were fairly priced, of truly reasonable quality on a consistent basis, more accessable to the poor, and tradeable piece for piece (where you give up one to get another, plain and simple) and if China wasn't the worst pain in the ass as far as copyright laws, then I wouldn't hate the media industry as much as I do now.

If any of you have 1/2 a brain, then you will boycott all music, companies that advertise on radio stations and movie networks, movie networks themselves, and all theatres. Only if we do that can we stop their perversely cruel draconian measures that are not far from the Marquis de Sade's work himself.

Shame on the f&*@!+~ media industry for their extreme violence. It is one thing to seek a legal remedy, it is another to destroy a man's entire life and livelihood. If any of you here endorse them and what they are doing then I hate you and I shame you even more, for you are a lemming and a fool who would give up even more civil liberty each successive day. (NO, I am NOT implying that so called copyright infringement is or is not a civil liberty, but at least a fair trial and protection from cruel and inhuman punishement is, haven't you ever read the book __Papillon__?)

We are in real danger here in the USA. Our weakly designed democracy is gradually turning into slivers, and we have a government with a technology so powerful that there is no way that we could stop it if it chooses to try to enslave us a la the story by George Orwell __1984__.

Beware, but don't be intimidated, this is NOT the United SOVIET States of America, not yet that is...

If you agree, please give a thumbs up, let's gets something strong going!!!

The funniest part is I think you're being serious.

yea the RIAA will never put out quality music, while the MPAA has great epics like Lord of the Rings under its name course the MPAA has its duds too but a good movie outlasts a CD with 2 good tracks in the eye of the customer.

The funniest part of your schpiel, of which there are many contenders, is that I think you're actually serious.

Get off your moral high horses. jeez. this doesnt hurt the movie company @ all!! They will still make a gazillion dollars off this crappy movie. Its just a bunch of big brother scare tactics that are being used because the they're so afraid of really losing money- which wont happen because there IS a differance between the pc version and the big screen. People will still go and fork out the outrageous amount to sit in a movie.

In the end- if its a good movie and people really like it they will buy the DVD when its out. No harm done.

said by anonodude:

---

How are they greedy? This guy stole from them and they caught him. Justice served.

---

You just don't get it, do you? It's not about who's right or wrong anymore. It's about who has the most $$$. Yes, he shouldn't have done what he did. But the MPAA went way overboard. But that doesn't matter, since they have the money, they always get their way.

How did they go overboard? They found the guy stealing from them and pressed charges. That seems perfectly reasonable to me.

The funniest thing about both of you guys is that you are both chicken $h!t and hide behind anonymity.

I am serious, and you are too stupid to get it. I feel sorry for you. I have never flamed anyone here, but you two deserve a blast furnace. Jerks.

Ok, Mr. Kaczynski. I think it's time to go back to your shed and write some more letters.

If they went and prosecuted movie downloaders, people will still go see movies in record numbers. Unlike music where people can easily survive off of listening to radio or not listening to music, people love to go to the theater and watching movies.

Your dumb, you obviously didn't see how good it was. Plus some people just want to know if a movie is worth wasting there hard earned money on. The only movies that would be effected by movie downloading are bad ones.

said by erthwjim4:

---

Hell, $8.50 and I can see three or four movies if I theater hop right, and that's worse than downloading three or four movies.

---

At least your an honest thief and that you actually know that stealing YOUR WAY is just as wrong as the guy who stole the work print and the 1000's of KaZaA, IRC, BitTorrent, etc. clones stealing intellectual property on p2p.

From the tone of your post you must be way under the age of 18 or permanently unemployed to be "theater hopping" to scam free viewings of movies you did not legally pay for.

Can you explain why YOU should not be dealt with just like the file traders and the others?? Your argument that "The punishment does not fit the crime" is meaningless, as bottom line, there are laws in place to impose penalties on people who break them. The Law does not differentiate shades of grey in most cases, and the penalty is more often than not a sufficient enough deterrent to prevent MOST from attempting the crime to begin with.

But there are always exceptions to every rule aren't there?

Stop sneaking in to movies and go get a job so you can afford to legally pay for them. If you don't like the price the movie theater is charging then don't go! A rather simple solution to your problem eh?

Hey, the web doesn't belong to ANYONE and it belongs to EVERYONE who have access to it, so seeking/searching out for a file/word/item/etc. cannot be consider STEALING. Like LaZ3R have said it before, if it isn't out there, then how are you even able to seek it? I agree with his position, where downloaders should not be prosecuted for any of their action(s) while uploaders should be should be responsible for the damaged they have done to our society (if any). I'm not trying to take side in this controversial subject, but just my own down the center opinion in response to your reply.

According to TiMES magazine, yes MIAA and MPAA has been affected moderately by all these piracy going especially in recent years, but just on the side note here, I don't see our economic has been influenced the slightest to my understanding by this escalating problem. The reason I described it as an 'escalating problem' is due to the fact that if MIAA/MPAA/or any other agencies does not take these issues seriously, then, the movie/music/and other industries will collapse into our own public hands. By then, there will be no artist contracts, no actors/actress, no directors. A world cannot on a FREE market based system, because humans are born with WANTS. There are way too much WANTS than GIVES, but that's another whole story.

So I just hope the MIAA/MPAA would enforce their regulations further enough just to at least limit or even decrease a bit of the online piracy, however, should these two major industries limit too much of our freedom to seek our way thru., the Internet, this battle will never end and I would be the first to take side with my fellow millions of Anti-MIAA/MPAA fellowship.

Just to extend on this... If I am "manufacturing" my own CD, I have to pay the author a royalty fee, which is usually 10-15% of the profit afaik? Since I make no profit, my contribution should be $0...

But seriously, what's the royalty fee that artists get per CD? Isn't it like 10 cents per song? Whatever the fee is, I wouldn't mind playing the "manufacturer" and paying the fee itself directly to the artist when I burn the music, since they are the ones who own the copyright anyway; bypassing RIAA or w/e. And it would be probably 10 times less then CD price now. Not sure if the contracts that the musicians sign would somehow prohibit such a thing though.

said by anonymous14694644974:

---

Why would it bother people? The legally established royalty value of a copy is less than ten percent of the first transfer price of blank media for both audio and video works. That's under a penny per music CD for all of the tracks on it at full CD quality. Seems like a perfectly fair rate to me. Start charging it on all blank computer CDs and forget attacking the technology business and the shared customers of both.

We're currently sitting just where we were before the Supreme Court said that player pianos were legal (and got mandatory mechanical licensing), the Supreme Court said that cable TV is legal (and we have must carry laws, requiring cable companies to make copies, not just letting hem), the Supreme Court said that video recording was legal (and we have a royalty and mandatory license), the Supreme Court said that home audi...

I think you can see the picture. Copyright holders looking to the past ignore the realities of the present and the final solution is the inevitable royalty arrangement on the blank media. And then the copyright holders suddenly discover, as with video tapes, that they are making a major chunk of their money from the technology they called illegal.

Meanwhile, they are kicking and screaming and suing everyone who sees the obvious lessons of history and justice (as interpreted by the Supreme Court and the Constitution).

---

I'm in Canada, and we already pay a levy on blank CD's that goes to the record companies to offset the losses from piracy.

After seeing the Hulk - I think the tv show is better. The darn movie is a sleeper

I agree. How do they find out someone is trading unless they invade his/her privacy and watch their PC/internet activity. Are warrants required to do this? If not, 1984 is just around the corner. Next they'll be watching what we do in our homes through our PC monitor screens.
My view on piracy is this. I didn't really buy CDs or DVDs; nor did I go to movies much. I was sick of being disappointed all the time-buying a CD with 1 good song or spending $8 to go see a steaming pile presented to me over the big screen. When I could preview CDs and movies and games through file-sharing, I began spending more money on the DVDs,CDs, and games which were of quality. I also started going to see the movies worth seeing. Of course I stopped downloading after I discovered the entertainment industry was going to destroy me if I did this. I guess they don't want my $$ unless they can sue me for it. Now I don't buy any CDs or DVDs, nor do I go to the theatre anymore.
If they would just leave the net alone, they probably would make more profits. And I really don't think they are loosing money from this anyway. How can they say their loss is due to piracy? How do they measure this? I think they are trying to blame their loss(which is probably due to the recent problems we are having with war and terrorism or maybe the music and movies just aren't as good as they used to be) on people who aren't people who go to the movies anyway or buy CDs/DVDs anyhow. They are loosing money because they are unreasonable. A copy is a copy anyway. It's not the real thing. No one is selling this stuff anyway. That would be a crime. Please people. Let's get these money mongers out of our private lives.

said by aneenerdude:

---

Regardless, the downloaders are taking something that doesn't belong to them, causing damage to innocent people and are just as much to blame for piracy as the uploaders.

---

This is true, but I will not support these slobbering fat cats. I do not download, or buy cd's or go to movies to feed these fatass cats that rip off dumb artist. Sooner or later if I want to see a movie, it will be on TV for free, I can wait.

said by aneenerdude:

---

How does it suck? He stole. He got caught. He's gonna get punished. What sucks is that the people he gave it to didn't get in trouble, not that he did.

---

Let's just execute him. And his wife and kids too.

I don't know what your definition of harsh is, but going to prison for 3 years due to copyright violations seems a whole lot better to me than going to prison for 30+ years on a murder conviction. Of course, both are to be avoided.

said by aneenerdude:

---

Where you make a joke, I'm coming close to honestly feeling. Anything that'll get people to actually take notice of the consequences of their actions.

---

Fine, then let's execute not just him and his wife and kids, but also his neighbors, colleagues, and anyone who looks like him.
[text was edited by author 2003-06-27 08:28:41]

said by aneenerdude:

---

How does it suck? He stole. He got caught. He's gonna get punished. What sucks is that the people he gave it to didn't get in trouble, not that he did.

---

Its the amount of punishment. Some of these copyright crimes have more time then violent offenses. Something is really wrong.

said by Aneenerguy:

---

Ok, Mr. Kaczynski. I think it's time to go back to your shed and write some more letters.

---

Since you seem to be an expert on crime and punishment, let me ask you this: I buy a movie from a web site in a foreign country, on DVD. It is makred "Region 2" and I PAID THE FULL RETAIL PRICE for it. And guess what? I'M STILL NOT ALLOWED TO WATCH IT.

So tell me, Captain Justice, WHERE IS THE THEFT here?? The MPAA stole from me, that's where. The MPAA has made it illegal to make future modifications to DVD players so they can read those disks AFTER THEY'VE BEEN BOUGHT AND PAID FOR, and the MPAA would like nothing better than to make it illegal for me to buy a DVD player made in Europe so I can play those films, WHICH I PAY FULL PRICE FOR.

Theft is despicable and should be punished by law. Stealing from thieves like the MPAA should be rewarded with a medal.

Educate yourself about facts before you post.
[text was edited by author 2003-06-27 08:38:35]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know what dollar value was assigned to the Work Print. Under the DMCA, the punishment is assigned based on the dollar value of the item being distributed. Since the Work Print is not an item with a price tag, what dollar value did they assign to illicit 3 years in prison and $250,000 fine?

I've been a fan of the Gong show (of all things) since I was a kid. I downloaded the "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind" movie back in December and loved it. (that was the last thing that I downloaded) After that, I pre-paid for the DVD version coming out in September. I bought all 3 of Chuck Barris' books and have read 2 of them so far. Downloading is a plus not a minus. It turns into more money spent than it would've in the past. The idiots (riaa mpaa) are just too stupid to see that. Darn I didn't pay $8.75 to see it in a theater, but I spent twice that much on the movie by buying the DVD before it even came out. Plus 3 books ranging in price from $6 (paperback) to $20 (Hardcover) each. So instead of spending $8.75, I spent close to $60 on the same subject.

funny how posts from these two come at the same time in this thread and look how close the IP is to each other. They're butt-buddies sharing DSL in their dormroom.
[text was edited by author 2003-06-27 09:21:33]

Box Office sales will not drop based on piracy or bootlegging. The #1 activity to do on a date is attend a movie. As long as the motion picture studios keep a wide diversity of films at the theatres, they'll always have people in the seats.

Actually it's part of the patriot act from October 2001. The good thing about that is that it was designed to intercept email from terrorists to try and stop anything from happening before it actually starts. mpaa and riaa took this as their chance to invade everyone's privacy. Also the act lets ISPs volunteer info on their users whether they are guilty or not, without the ISPs getting in trouble for being wrong. A user isn't allowed to sue the ISP for damages of false accusation. Good law and stupid law at the same time. So far, Verizon has been the only one to try and protect people.

said by anime20x:

---

Hey, the web doesn't belong to ANYONE and it belongs to EVERYONE who have access to it, so seeking/searching out for a file/word/item/etc. cannot be consider STEALING. Like LaZ3R have said it before, if it isn't out there, then how are you even able to seek it? I agree with his position, where downloaders should not be prosecuted for any of their action(s) while uploaders should be should be responsible for the damaged they have done to our society (if any).

---

-Not that I give it to much thought to be honest, but isn't that kind of like saying if looters break a window in a department store and happen to leave some of the electronic equipment behind,that it would be then ok to pick something up and take it home? Hehe (hey, THEY broke the window after all!) In most states, even if someone else steals something and gives it to you, it's considered 'receiving stolen property' (this is not to say that I agree with all laws on the books-just a point)

And of course you can buy DVDs for a very reasonable price. Sometimes less than the CD of the soundtrac of the same movie, which is included on the DVD. And since movies take a WHOLE lot more to make than songs it makes the price that much more fair.