White House wants new copyright laws.

[Mazmaz]

Why did you make it seem like his job was so insecure?
I find it hard to visualize the head of anything being called into the office and getting laid off cause a few too many kids downloaded their DVDs this month.

[Yugl]

It's a private service, so it's not unrealistic. If your company (Industry or w/e you want to call it) isn't selling, there's no money to go around. Also, remember that prestige comes with hefty pricetags. CGI people aren't the most difficult individuals to find.

[Maaglin]

fucking lol at the amount of stupid in here. Actors / Musicians dont really care about piracy that much. The only musicians that really give a fuck are the ones who get a major cut based on album sales, or cut out the middle man and are their own record label. Same with actors, they get paid based on DOING the movie, and they get a couple extra bonuses based on how it does. Tom Cruise, I think, is one of the only ones who care, because he gets epic deals based on how his movies do in both theaters, as well as rentals / retail sales. I dont know, I could be wrong.

I do know though that musicians get most of their money from touring and merch sales, as well as sponsorships. Album sales are just a pretty number...but wont do a damn thing as far as money goes for them, all those album sales go to the record label. Thats why you dont see bands crying about piracy, they dont care...in fact piracy exposes them to new ears since people who wouldn't normally buy their album can actually hear their music.

Ummm, you do realize that for the studio to be able to pay big time actors big time money, the movies they put out have to make money right? So yes, actors very much care about piracy and the effect it has on the studios, since over time, it will directly affect their pay checks.

[Valisk]

Same with the music industry. Most artists make their money on touring because albums don't sell like they use to. So instead of getting a large cut from album sales like they use to, artist are getting a small percentage from declining album sales forcing them to rely on touring and appearances to get a bulk of their revenue. To say that actors/musicians don't care is foolish. You can't speak for all of them that don't voice their opinion on Oprah while shooting lightning out of their hands.

[NynJa]

How much money do you think a band gets per album sale? And from that same album sale, how much goes to the record label?

[guartz]

This entire point is extremely moot, considering film industry has been posting record profits lately. As in, highest then ever before.

[ronin sparthos]

This entire point is extremely moot, considering film industry has been posting record profits lately. As in, highest then ever before.

This.

Even with what some would call "rampant" piracy, the industry is still raking in record money off movies/music/artists.

[Ashmada]

you bashed me for pointing out that my husband works in the industry when my only point is there are other sides and the other side isn't just people making millions.

No, I quoted a statement of yours saying that you backed these laws because you're afraid your husband will lose his job and paraphrased it to choosing your financial interest over the aforementionned principles of democracy.

That paraphrase isn't bashing, it's merely illustrating a choice you clearly made.
Wiretapping on mere suspîcion is a violation of both the presumption of innocence and privacy; and you said yourself you defend that law because your husband works in the industry.
If you take it as an attack to paraphrase your position, then I guess you're internally questionning it?


I don't see how your husband not being Johnny Depp or "not making millions" invalidates any of that. I don't even remember mentionning "people making millions".
Irrationally shouting "MAH HUSBAND HAZ RIGHTS AND PRIVACY TOO" doesn't paint you in a very good light and you've already done it twice so far.
Still waiting on an explanation for that one (mostly for humoristic reasons).

[notorious bum]

This.

Even with what some would call "rampant" piracy, the industry is still raking in record money off movies/music/artists.

Its this exact dose of reality that makes me facepalm so fucking hard when I hear today's generation of neocons, who aren't fucking rich, support/make excuses for these fat cat bastards and politicians.

Those rich crackers don't give a fuck about you buddy lol Capitalism has been a retarded excuse from the beginning, who ever thought they could possibly get a piece of that pie one day is a damn fool.

/rant off

[Ksandra]

No, I quoted a statement of yours saying that you backed these laws because you're afraid your husband will lose his job and paraphrased it to choosing your financial interest over the aforementionned principles of democracy.

me supporting "it" was piracy laws in general, not specific to this one.

[edit] and to clarify, the only thing I've talked about is the stealing and downloading of content, and the rights the industry has to prevent it. I have not given any stance one way or the other on wire tapping. So you basically jumped on a sentence without reading the whole thread to notice.

[Plow]

No, I quoted a statement of yours saying that you backed these laws because you're afraid your husband will lose his job and paraphrased it to choosing your financial interest over the aforementionned principles of democracy.

That paraphrase isn't bashing, it's merely illustrating a choice you clearly made.
Wiretapping on mere suspîcion is a violation of both the presumption of innocence and privacy; and you said yourself you defend that law because your husband works in the industry.
If you take it as an attack to paraphrase your position, then I guess you're internally questionning it?


I don't see how your husband not being Johnny Depp or "not making millions" invalidates any of that. I don't even remember mentionning "people making millions".
Irrationally shouting "MAH HUSBAND HAZ RIGHTS AND PRIVACY TOO" doesn't paint you in a very good light and you've already done it twice so far.
Still waiting on an explanation for that one (mostly for humoristic reasons).

you basically just said her husband deserving to get paid for his work infringes upon your right to free shit

just fyi

[Qalbert]

hey ashmada i posted a link to that new amon amarth in the music request thread, if you want it

[aurik]

How much money do you think a band gets per album sale? And from that same album sale, how much goes to the record label?

None. The answer is none. The vast majority of bands get zilch, zero, nada from album sales. This is because the record labels "fronts" money to the band to pay for things like studio time / production / promotion / marketing / airtime / etc. Of course, the record label generally owns part or all of those services, so the record label essentially is paying itself with money that they add to the band's debt. Then, every album that sells, a very small fraction goes towards paying down this debt. Since most bands never sell enough albums to pay off the incidental costs (you try paying off hundreds of thousands of dollars at 10 cents per sale) they never see a single penny from any album sale.

The only saving grace for content creators in this arrangement is that this fronted money is unrecoverable from the label's perspective. That means the label can't set collectors on the band later to recover the imaginary debt. That means when the band tours and sell albums / t-shirts / tickets, the band generally profits from that activity as they can pocket the markups, sidestepping the label (this is why labels are now pushing "360" contracts which cover touring). This is why many artists actually flat-out encourage illegal copying: you aren't costing them a cent, and in fact you are more likely to go see their concert / buy a t-shirt if you like their songs, regardless of whether you paid for the album. By downloading and "sharing" their content, you aren't sticking it to them at all--you are hurting exclusively "the man".

Unless, like Metallica, the band is savvy enough to own their own label. Then they're happy to speak out against illegal copying, even though they were all for it before they got big.

[Cadsuane]

Same with the music industry. Most artists make their money on touring because albums don't sell like they use to. So instead of getting a large cut from album sales like they use to, artist are getting a small percentage from declining album sales forcing them to rely on touring and appearances to get a bulk of their revenue. To say that actors/musicians don't care is foolish. You can't speak for all of them that don't voice their opinion on Oprah while shooting lightning out of their hands.

Bands have always relied on tour revenue unless they were very huge and a good ways into their career already. To the vast majority of musical acts the album deal meant little more than pocket money and promotion for the live show. This was true well before internet piracy.

[Guyverarmor]

From what I have read, bands only make about maybe 1$/per album and that has to be divided between all members and manager I would assume.. so yeah, they make next to nothing on album sales.

[Plow]

Unless, like Metallica, the band is savvy enough to own their own label. Then they're happy to speak out against illegal copying, even though they were all for it before they got big.

the fuck?

[aurik]

Read about Metallica's historical position on bootlegs.

[guartz]

he's probably talking about bootleg cassettes

[Khajit]

Metallica stole all it's hit songs from other people in the first place so them complaining about pirates is lulzy at best.

[Elrina]

no, sorry, arguing that it being available for pirating sooner than it's available on netflix etc. makes pirating ok is retarded

Amazon now offers unlimited free streaming of a ton of movies, although it's still pretty limited just like Netflix. It's only for prime members though, which is like $90 for a year. They also have huge amounts of streaming movies to rent that aren't available free yet, although they're a bit overpriced still.

Point being, there's now direct competition in that market, and what you're asking for is well on its way.

You're simply being impatient and greedy about a luxury that you've convinced yourself you have a right to.

I wasn't arguing that it should be available to pirate sooner than it's available on Netflix, etc. It's already available sooner to pirate, and that's the point, and the problem. It shouldn't be. Netflix, or Amazon, or Hulu Plus, or whatever, should have the same accessibility as Demonoid. Until there are reasonable, legitimate alternatives that offer the same material just as early, people are going to pirate it.

I'm actually a member of Amazon Prime, and I didn't realize they offered that. I'm going to have to check it out, even if it's limited.

And while I'm glad it's on it's way, it's inevitable, because the only other alternative is an overreaching and severe violation of privacy and rights with consequences that extend well beyond the consumption of media. Like this idea of wiretapping people who stream media. You don't have to be for piracy to be against this.

And I am impatient, but I'm not greedy. It's not really a luxury that I feel I'm entitled to, so much as an understanding that the internet and digital age has given rise to something that can't be stopped without heavy oppression. It's like when you're a child with a child's mind and a child's ideals until you grow up and are introduced to the cutthroat reality of life. Or the story (even if you only consider it a story) of Eve being tricked into eating from the Tree of Life and gaining the knowledge of Good and Evil. There is no going back. Just like we all must grow up and realize life is a harsh place, and the old are sometimes forced to realize that change will come whether they embrace it or not, things have changed and the industries need to, and will, accept this sooner or later. Until then, they have and will continue to feel the pain of resisting that change. And they will do whatever they can to share and inflict that pain on as many of those forcing them to it as possible.

It's up to us to understand and support those laws and policies that encourage and defend both copyright and fair use in ways that are realistic and fair, and fight those that are meant more for violating the rights, lives and privacy of everyone in an ultimately futile struggle to prevent change. I'm not arguing for the ability to consume media for free whenever and however I want, just that there need to be fair and reasonable ways of doing so legitimately that are intuitive and convenient, not riddled with limitations and costs that make people feel like the benefits of piracy are too attractive to ignore.