Bitter Hurt Locker

Glad it's not me but still, it angers me that these companies are allowed to ruin people's lives due to copyright infringement. Despite what you think of piracy, suing for millions is an immoral reaction for a moment's indiscretion.

Now they're gonna do it on a large scale.

Hurt Locker producers prepare piracy lawsuit - MSN Movies News

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

laidbackfreak

Dont get me started on this, it's crazy arguments by the old school who realise they are losing control of the supply chains etc.
The ridiculous sums involved are to scare the living daylights out of folks into not doing it rather than look at ways to improve and utilise.

Off to a dark room to lie down and relax

networker050184

What I find interesting is that people think they can just download what ever they want without consequences. Would these same people have broken into the studio and stolen a copy of the movie before it was released? Would they have received stolen goods from someone that did? I don't understand why people think they shouldn't have to suffer the consequences for their online actions. Maybe the million dollar law suites will teach someone a lesson.

Ahriakin

Kinda Ironic considering they have refused to acknowledge (let alone compensate) the soldier the story was very primarily obviously based on. I am not endorsing piracy in an way shape or form but the simple reality of business these days is with anything that can be presented digitally you are competing with free (ignoring ethics for the moment, speaking purely about the financial side). You do not encourage people to choose to pay you by suing their family and friends.

msteinhilber

laidbackfreak wrote: »

Dont get me started on this, it's crazy arguments by the old school who realise they are losing control of the supply chains etc.
The ridiculous sums involved are to scare the living daylights out of folks into not doing it rather than look at ways to improve and utilise.

Off to a dark room to lie down and relax

Perhaps it's the capitalist in me, but if you invest money to create a product or service then you are entitled to reap the rewards for such products and services. People who steal should expect the possibility of being held accountable for their actions.

Are you proposing that because a theft issue exists, that it is the fault of the producers and they deserve it? Or are you just trying to find a weak excuse to justify pirating copyrighted materials?

earweed

Hate to say it like this but anyone who went around the system knew they were going around the system and that it was WRONG. Doing this they should have had it in their head somewhere that there was the possibility of being caught. I have sympathy for the little people who were sued, it should have mainly been the ones who distributed it.

arwes

Part of the problem is their movie was on such a limited release that people who didn't live in major cities and really wanted to see it had to wait months before being able to see the film, unless they really wanted to drive like 300 miles. People aren't going to do that. I almost downloaded Moon since it didn't open anywhere near me, but I ended up patiently waiting for it to hit DVD (awesome movie btw). I was still kinda pissed that it didn't open anywhere near me though.

msteinhilber

arwes wrote: »

Part of the problem is their movie was on such a limited release that people who didn't live in major cities and really wanted to see it had to wait months before being able to see the film, unless they really wanted to drive like 300 miles. People aren't going to do that. I almost downloaded Moon since it didn't open anywhere near me, but I ended up patiently waiting for it to hit DVD (awesome movie btw). I was still kinda pissed that it didn't open anywhere near me though.

That completely justifies theft.

Back in November or December of 2009 the movie "The Road" was out. It was supposed to be released as a wide release but ended up being a very limited release. I had a desire to see the movie without waiting for a DVD release, so I drove a couple hours to Chicago to see it.

You do make a point though, society these days can justify just about any action for a wide array of fairly asinine reasons. It's really a shame that things have been able to progress to a point where we can overlook so many instances of stories that are morally or ethically wrong and quickly find a handful of reasons why it's not that bad.

networker050184

arwes wrote: »

Part of the problem is their movie was on such a limited release that people who didn't live in major cities and really wanted to see it had to wait months before being able to see the film, unless they really wanted to drive like 300 miles. People aren't going to do that. I almost downloaded Moon since it didn't open anywhere near me, but I ended up patiently waiting for it to hit DVD (awesome movie btw). I was still kinda pissed that it didn't open anywhere near me though.

I want a million dollars and don't want to wait to earn it. Should I just go steal it from someone's bank account? People think they are entitled to everything man.

DevilWAH

Its such a grey area this stuff.

Who here has honestly never lent a CD to a friend (or DVD) copied a tape for some one.

All of that is piracy, but the music industry never moan about people copying tape.

As Stephen Fry said, When he was a kid he was always copying Tapes and CD, then as he grew up he copied less and brought more. And I think that's the same, as a young adult I was downloading films and CD all the time. Now A bit older and a bit richer and I purchase what I want.

At the end of the day piracy might not be right but it does give the film/music industry a massive advertisement base.

But right or wrong its not going away, the more ways they develop to stop it the better ways people work around them. It would be much better if the worked on a way to use it to there advantage than fight against it.

Devilsbane

I was actually just talking to a friend about drm and piracy last night. He told me that he will sometimes use a pirated version of the game just because it works. The retail version has so many holes to jump though, it sometimes isn't even possible to play it. (He has purchased a video game, to just go and download a cracked version so he could play.)

arwes

I'm not justifying anything, I'm just guessing what the mindset is of the people who do this. You've got to admit it's pretty annoying when film studios do a big national marketing push and get people all excited for a film only to end the commercial with 'opening Friday in select cities'. 9 times out of 10 it's a art house type film that I wouldn't bother with, but occasionally there's a film that I might want to see out of curiosity's sake (like Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus).

msteinhilber

Devilsbane wrote: »

I was actually just talking to a friend about drm and piracy last night. He told me that he will sometimes use a pirated version of the game just because it works. The retail version has so many holes to jump though, it sometimes isn't even possible to play it. (He has purchased a video game, to just go and download a cracked version so he could play.)

Can you provide an example? I don't play a whole lot of PC games, but a handful of the one's I do play I have friends who cannot play online with me because they elected to pirate the game instead of buy it. Seems to me, that besides losing functionality of the game that you also introduce more risk of something not working correctly due to the fact you often have to rely on cracks and other workarounds to get things to work. Then on top of that you have the security aspect as well.

Sorry but I don't buy that argument. A game with controls built in to deter piracy in my opinion is not at all likely to be more likely to function correctly on a computer due to some hack job pirate weeding out anti-piracy measures and repackaging the software without.

Devilsbane

msteinhilber wrote: »

Can you provide an example? I don't play a whole lot of PC games, but a handful of the one's I do play I have friends who cannot play online with me because they elected to pirate the game instead of buy it. Seems to me, that besides losing functionality of the game that you also introduce more risk of something not working correctly due to the fact you often have to rely on cracks and other workarounds to get things to work. Then on top of that you have the security aspect as well.

Sorry but I don't buy that argument. A game with controls built in to deter piracy in my opinion is not at all likely to be more likely to function correctly on a computer due to some hack job pirate weeding out anti-piracy measures and repackaging the software without.

I bought GTA4 a few months back. Took me 45 minutes to actually start playing the game because I had to create numerous online accounts and then open the email they sent to verify my address ect. What if I wouldn't have had internet access?

That is the only game I had trouble getting going. I don't know what games he referred to.

arwes

Everyone I know that's tried using pirated games have had trojans, keyloggers and other nasty things installed as part of their no-cd crack & what not. I hate dealing with disks so if it's not on Steam (or one of the alternatives like Direct2Drive or GoodOldGames) I don't bother.

networker050184

Devilsbane wrote: »

I bought GTA4 a few months back. Took me 45 minutes to actually start playing the game because I had to create numerous online accounts and then open the email they sent to verify my address ect. What if I wouldn't have had internet access?

Then don't buy a game that requires online access.

laidbackfreak

msteinhilber wrote: »

Perhaps it's the capitalist in me, but if you invest money to create a product or service then you are entitled to reap the rewards for such products and services. People who steal should expect the possibility of being held accountable for their actions.

Totally agree

msteinhilber wrote: »

Are you proposing that because a theft issue exists, that it is the fault of the producers and they deserve it? Or are you just trying to find a weak excuse to justify pirating copyrighted materials?

Nope not in the slightest as I said rather than go after the end user they should look closer to home at the distribution model as a whole.
Rather than seeking to raise prices with so called market pricing, and continue to destroy the retail market for both music and video with unrealistically high list prices, they need to focus on putting their product in front of their customers and making it appealing to buy in a way that suits them.

When tape decks were launched they said they would destroy the music industry, when VCR's were launched they said the same and it didn't happen then and isn't going to happen now.
What will happen is the breakdown of the traditional models and the emergence of new ones like apple and amazon etc.
I can't find the reports I've read in the past but if do I'll post them that shows the user base who download actually spends more on the products.
Ok yes there are a small minority who are prolific and out to make a buck but they are in minority and what I would consider to be the distributors, go after them by all means but leave the end users alone, it makes more economic sense after all.

tiersten

DevilWAH wrote: »

Who here has honestly never lent a CD to a friend (or DVD) copied a tape for some one.

You can lend a CD so long as it is the original CD and the person doesn't rip it. If you've made a personal backup then you can't use it during the time that you've lent it though.

Devilsbane

tiersten wrote: »

You can lend a CD so long as it is the original CD and the person doesn't rip it. If you've made a personal backup then you can't use it during the time that you've lent it though.

So if I buy a cd, rip it to my computer, and then throw it away. Is this now illegal since I don't posses the media anymore?

earweed

I remember when VCR's first came out (yeah I'm old) and the movie industry actually fought VCR's being produced with a record feature just because of their potential loss of revenue. The same has been true of any type of recording devices through the years. The music/movie/and now gaming industries have had to contend with individuals pirating and they have had to build in features to prevent priacy.
A big problem has been in the foreign markets. My sister used to be a teacher in Beijing and said that it was common for the DVD's to be available there within days of a theatrical release here in the US.

tiersten

Devilsbane wrote: »

So if I buy a cd, rip it to my computer, and then throw it away. Is this now illegal since I don't posses the media anymore?

No because you've still only got 1 copy of it. You can't lend out the original CD and enjoy your copy at the same time because there will be 2 copies of it being used at the same time.

Devilsbane

earweed wrote: »

I remember when VCR's first came out (yeah I'm old) and the movie industry actually fought VCR's being produced with a record feature just because of their potential loss of revenue. The same has been true of any type of recording devices through the years. The music/movie/and now gaming industries have had to contend with individuals pirating and they have had to build in features to prevent priacy.

Thanks to Fred Rogers (yep, thats Mr. Rogers) for going in front of congress (numerous times I believe) to fight for our right to record TV on our brand new fancy state of the art VCR's.

Devilsbane

tiersten wrote: »

No because you've still only got 1 copy of it. You can't lend out the original CD and enjoy your copy at the same time because there will be 2 copies of it being used at the same time.

But how can I guarentee that someone didn't go through the trash and steal my Brittany Spears cd? (kidding here)

earweed

Devilsbane wrote: »

So if I buy a cd, rip it to my computer, and then throw it away. Is this now illegal since I don't posses the media anymore?

No your still legal..some may argue not very bright for tossing your cd,though..lol
As long as you don't share your files you're ok.

tiersten

Devilsbane wrote: »

But how can I guarentee that someone didn't go through the trash and steal my Brittany Spears cd? (kidding here)

You're just taking the argument to extremes now. You're not committing piracy because you're not involved at this point.

Paul Boz

The lawsuits are frivolous and don't act as any kind of effective deterrent because piracy goes up more and more every year. As more people are connected to high-speed Internet links the trend will continue upward. The Internet is rather fascinating in that it makes people who would otherwise be considered benign become very brazen. There's a certain level of anonymity with the Internet that makes people more daring or more willing to break established laws and customs. Case in point, many people that aren't satisfied with their marriages and don't have the will to actually **** go online and hook up with cyber girlfriends.

This is why you get grown adults pirating anything and everything they can. They would under normal circumstances never consider actually stealing physical media (ala going into Barns & Noble and stealing thousands of dollars of books).

You also have to look at the risk versus reward. If you take even the most rudimentary security measures to hide yourself and your mischief you will almost 100% go without being popped.

Hyper-Me

Is stealing wrong? Yeah

Has 9/10 of everyone on this forum downloaded something illegally? I'd guarantee it.

The problem here is two fold.

1. The companies putting out media thats being pirated have not kept up with the times. Making items considerably cheaper if purchased online, allowing previews, etc would all stem the problem to a certain degree. A good example here is how studios block Netflix from distributing new movies for up to 30 days or more after its initial DVD release. Why? So people will buy the movie without the option to try it out.

2. People find justification for every action they make. However dumb or stupid it may be, people find SOME reason that they think is valid. This point is very well expressed in the book How to Win Friends & Influence People. It sounds vapid, but its actually a good read about the workings of the human mind.

RobertKaucher

laidbackfreak wrote: »

Dont get me started on this, it's crazy arguments by the old school who realise they are losing control of the supply chains etc.
The ridiculous sums involved are to scare the living daylights out of folks into not doing it rather than look at ways to improve and utilise.

Off to a dark room to lie down and relax

I just wanted to point out that LaidBack appears to be stating that the damages awarded seem to be unfair. He does not seem to be saying it is OK for people to pirate movies or anything like it.

I also believe the analogy to tape recorders/VCR is poor as well as with that medium you had to spend time and money to reproduce them and frequently got a poorer quality item. In this case you can get hundred of songs/movies in a single click and thousands of people can do the same all at the same time.

I believe that what we do not like to discuss is that this enters into an area of the human brain where many people do not see this as theft. And if you really consider it, it does not meet the normal definition of theft that we have been accustomed to for the past 500,000 years. It is seen as a physical act. I take something from you and now you do not have it any more. I'm not saying this is morally correct. I am simply pointing out that from a societal perspective we have not been conditioned to deal with this sort of theft. And a person (most of whom do not grasp the scale of this issue in a real way) should not be financially crippled for the rest of their lives for something they do not fully understand.

As intellectual beings we might know it is wrong, but as most people do not view it as the same sort of act as physically taking something from another we should find ways to punish the crime that do not do the modern equivelent of the practice of sending someone to a debtor's prison. I am certain we will eventually find a way to deal with this that is fair and in 4 generations people will look back on the damages given to these companies and think "Wow, that was so wrong!" And they will also look back on illegal file sharing and think, "Why the hell did people ever think that was ok?"

networker050184

RobertKaucher wrote: »

I just wanted to point out that LaidBack appears to be stating that the damages awarded seem to be unfair. He does not seem to be saying it is OK for people to pirate movies or anything like it.

I also believe the analogy to tape recorders/VCR is poor as well as with that medium you had to spend time and money to reproduce them and frequently got a poorer quality item. In this case you can get hundred of songs/movies in a single click and thousands of people can do the same all at the same time.

I believe that what we do not like to discuss is that this enters into an area of the human brain where many people do not see this as theft. And if you really consider it, it does not meet the normal definition of theft that we have been accustomed to for the past 500,000 years. It is seen as a physical act. I take something from you and now you do not have it any more. I'm not saying this is morally correct. I am simply pointing out that from a societal perspective we have not been conditioned to deal with this sort of theft. And a person (most of whom do not grasp the scale of this issue in a real way) should not be financially crippled for the rest of their lives for something they do not fully understand.

As intellectual beings we might know it is wrong, but as most people do not view it as the same sort of act as physically taking something from another we should find ways to punish the crime that do not do the modern equivelent of the practice of sending someone to a debtor's prison. I am certain we will eventually find a way to deal with this that is fair and in 4 generations people will look back on the damages given to these companies and think "Wow, that was so wrong!" And they will also look back on illegal file sharing and think, "Why the hell did people ever think that was ok?"

I agree with what you are saying about the nonphysical aspect, but the common person not totally understanding law is not something new with the information age. I'd even venture to say that MORE people understand that pirating is wrong then before the spread of the internet. Ignorance is not a valid defense IMO.

Just for clarification, I understand you are not trying to defend pirating.

Devilsbane

networker050184 wrote: »

Ignorance is not a valid defense IMO.

And usually the law agrees with that.

DevilWAH

tiersten wrote: »

You can lend a CD so long as it is the original CD and the person doesn't rip it. If you've made a personal backup then you can't use it during the time that you've lent it though.

No you can't, read the message that apears when you play a DVD.

http://blogs.nitobi.com/dave/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/copyright.gif

Note it includes no unauthorised Lending. Ok that is UK and Island for 20th century Fox but it is the same on most DVD's and the same applies for CD's. The companies sell them to an individual, but they still own the rights to what you can do with that copy.

You are not allows to sell DVD's or CD either... The fact the industry turns a blind eye to people selling DVD/CD's on places like Ebay is because they chooses to. But no one has a right to do it.