Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Illegal Film Downloading Up 33% In the UK

Unknown Lamer posted more than 3 years ago | from the old-media-is-so-cute dept.

Piracy 259

moderators_are_w*nke writes "The BBC have picked up a report from 'internet intelligence' company Envisional showing illegal film downloading is up 33% in the UK since 2006. The solution is apparently for content providers to 'compete with piracy and get their content out there themselves as easily and as quickly and as cheaply as possible.'"

cancel ×

259 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Ahh... the good ol' days. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36683930)

Remember when there was anticipation for the midnight showing of a new movie release. Now just waiting for it to pop up on usenet. (weeks before the official release)

Will never happen. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36683938)

"The solution is apparently for content providers to 'compete with piracy and get their content out there themselves as easily and as quickly and as cheaply as possible'"

Will never happens, they live in the past, not in the future. Such a thing just isn't possible for them to even imagine.
I'm still dreaming of a service similar to Steam, for movies.

Re:Will never happen. (5, Insightful)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684052)

Except that Steam is DRMed shit. If anything what is needed is a GOG or Amazon music or other DRM free thing for movies. If I buy something I don't want some random suit somewhere deciding I can't have it anymore and flipping a proverbial switch that invalidates my purchase.

Re:Will never happen. (2)

JMJimmy (2036122) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684186)

ala Sony with PS3 Linux.

Re:Will never happen. (1)

jojoba_oil (1071932) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684214)

While I agree with you that we should have more outfits like GOG.com, Steam is a lot better than some of the other DRM out there. It's incredibly easy to break, doesn't install false drivers, allows offline backup/restore and play of games, etc. And the good thing is that once you break it for one game, you've basically broken it for all the games. (The exception is the few games that also include other DRM.)

The only thing that I wish Steam would allow is transfer of games between accounts; gifting of a "used" copy of a game to a friend, for example... But they're more interested in capturing the money by restricting resale.

To be clear: DRM sucks, but when I have to choose a form of DRM in order to get a game, I choose Steam over the others.

Re:Will never happen. (1)

Tx (96709) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684436)

The exception is the few games that also include other DRM.

More and more seem to be ending up in this category recently, sadly.

Re:Will never happen. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684474)

To be clear: DRM sucks, but when I have to choose a form of DRM in order to get a game, I choose Steam over the others.

That's like saying "i'm happy that i've been rolled over by a Prius, it could have been a Humvee.".

Re:Will never happen. (1)

Moryath (553296) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684514)

I was looking to get the major pack of Crysis in order to play Mechwarrior: Living Legends.

Then I saw the crapass DRM that floats around with Crysis, even via Steam.

Nope. Not going to infect my system.

Re:Will never happen. (4, Informative)

Dynedain (141758) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684250)

Steam may be DRM, but they're incredibly smart in that they've made getting and playing content easier than BitTorrent and cracking. Time and time again, people have pointed out that this is the only way to compete with copyright violation, and the success of Steam is proof in the pudding.

Re:Will never happen. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684396)

That and by showing me massive discounts on games I'd have never considered pirating means I got my impulse buy on. I probably won't be using Steam much for retail games for day of releases (MMO's most likely being the exception) but getting the old PoP's and Torchlight (games worth supporting) is always a plus. Also since Steam is holding the game install files it means I don't need to double store the ISO rip and the install on my computer. Now my thing is I can't dynamically move my Steam installs off my drive that's filling up.

Re:Will never happen. (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684754)

Steam may be DRM, but they're incredibly smart in that they've made getting and playing content easier than BitTorrent and cracking. Time and time again, people have pointed out that this is the only way to compete with copyright violation, and the success of Steam is proof in the pudding.

If you ever run across the headline "Steam shutting its doors", make a point to read the comments then.

Re:Will never happen. (1)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684254)

I'm still dreaming of a service similar to Steam, for movies.

Lovefilm and iTunes offer services what you are after.

Re:Will never happen. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684318)

I don't see 75% off sales on a hundred titles every 2 to 3 months on those. Also, considering the average movie clocks in at under two hours of entertainment they're ridiculously expensive. Games give me waaaaaaaaay better value for money.

Re:Will never happen. (1)

Tx (96709) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684338)

Well, porn companies are doing this, you can buy DRM-free HD and DVD movie downloads...erm, so I'm told.

Re:Will never happen. (2)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684434)

*Buy* porn?! Ahahahahahaha!

Here's a tip that doesn't involve any torrents. Take any fetish you have, and put it into Google along with the term 'tube'. If you ever exhaust that supply, well, you might want to seek professional help.

Honestly I wonder how the porn industry makes any money anymore. It must all be off of people over the age of 35 who don't know how the internet works.

Re:Will never happen. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684518)

*Buy* movies?! Ahahahahahaha!

Here's a tip that doesn't involve any torrents. Take any plot you like, and put it into Google along with the term 'cinema'. If you ever exhaust that supply, well, you might want to seek professional help.

Honestly I wonder how the movie industry makes any money anymore. It must all be off of people over the age of 35 who don't know how the internet works.

Re:Will never happen. (1)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684636)

That's cute, but you see Mr. AC, when you're going to watch something for 2+ hours, a lot of people prefer it not to look like pixelated trash. These people buy movies.

Now I can only speak for myself, but I think that porn a) isn't necessarily linear for most who grew up online and b) doesn't require the same degree of quality as it's usually a 30ish minute exercise anyway.

Re:Will never happen. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684540)

If nobody paid for porn, there wouldn't be any porn. That is a nightmare that can't be allowed to happen. Which is why some of us pay for it willingly, at least the stuff we really like, even though we're well aware how to get it free. Hard as it may be for you to imagine, not everybody is a shameless freeloader.

Re:Will never happen. (1)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684720)

But you see that is a lie. There are artists who draw erotic imagery for fun, and even though the best usually end up taking commissions, almost nobody starts at that level. Further, other people get off on exhibition and make and post recordings of their intercourse without (perceivable) cost (bandwidth costs are usually defrayed by ads, etc.).

You're also disregarding the market of secondary products, a lot a big name stars make money from selling physical items such as autographed things.

Re:Will never happen. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684554)

It must all be off of people over the age of 35 who don't know how the internet works.

Actually, we're the ones that shaped and followed the development of the internet from its start, you're just an end product.

Re:Will never happen. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684564)

I have a fetish about duck and I search for duck tube and it found nothing of interest. I still have to commission my duck raping porn....

Re:Will never happen. (2)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684644)

Will never happens, they live in the past, not in the future. Such a thing just isn't possible for them to even imagine.

Media companies always live in the past. There is always a business model that transforms the industry until it becomes outdated yet held on to even as it drags the industry down in to near collapse. Then someone finally adapts to reality by implementing a new business model and the survivors all jump ship. Reality often involves disruptive technology. You can see this in the history of Hollywood (studio system, television) and music (radio).

Of course - that history also shows a grudgingly slow adaptation to change. But change does eventually happen.

Common Sense! (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36683954)

It's about frikken time someone admitted that! I've been saying for years that I don't pirate stuff because it's free - I pirate stuff because it's the only way I can get the product that I want, without DRM and without archaic physical media, and that will actually work on my Linux HTPC.

My Impatience (4, Insightful)

improfane (855034) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684070)

I torrent but I am not a pirate.

How is this possible?

I recently felt like watching DS9 so I started torrenting a season of it. After watching an episode I proceeded to buy four box sets online.

I went back to watching my torrented versions. How convenient they are!

When they arrived, I deleted all the episodes I watched and started watching the DVDs from the boxset on TV.

Not only do I have Babylon 5 and SG, I have almost completed my DS9 series. They were all collected in the same fashion. Streaming or torrents first and then proper purchases.

Why the fuck would I buy something before knowing what it is like first?

Re:My Impatience (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684148)

I torrent but I am not a pirate.

Wrong darling. You've still been part of a copyright infringing transaction. Saying you've bought the product does not, under current law, make it all OK.

Re:My Impatience (4, Interesting)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684222)

Saying you've bought the product does not, under current law, make it all OK.

It does, however, invalidate every self-serving, self-righteous, and moralistic argument in support of said law.

Which, when you think about it, says a great deal about the law itself.

Re:My Impatience (1)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684384)

It does, however, invalidate every self-serving, self-righteous, and moralistic argument in support of said law.

It does? Well, I guess that would depend on who you ask (since not everyone has the same morals).

Re:My Impatience (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684456)

Yes it does.

YOU PAID FOR IT.

ANY ethical argument then becomes completely null and void.

Sadly, due to how the industry tries to abuse it's paying customers it is actually much easier to participate in a torrent swarm than to create your own similar media files from the physical disks you already own. This is a practical issue caused by the industry's own paranoia and disrespect for the paying customer.

As someone who uses the more legitimate approach, I really can't fault anyone else for not wanting to bother with it.

Re:My Impatience (2)

improfane (855034) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684244)

If I could not have streamed or downloaded something in advance, I would never have bought it.

This might be why music and movie sales are up these days.

Re:My Impatience (1)

TheThiefMaster (992038) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684452)

Torrenting almost always involves distributing pieces to a lot of other bit-torrent users. Each constitutes a copyright infringement, because you don't have distribution rights (aka copyright).

Even if you buy or own the thing you are bit-torrenting, it's still very much illegal if you don't own the copyright to that thing.

Re:My Impatience (2)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684638)

...which is all a side effect of the fact that the copyright owner wants to trample all over your personal property rights associated with the legitimate copy you bought from them.

Re:My Impatience (3)

TheThiefMaster (992038) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684700)

Personal property right to share your bought copy with a few thousand torrenters? I didn't know there was such a right.

Re:My Impatience (1, Troll)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684746)

Sharing with the swarm is a natural and obvious consequence of preventing the individual from using their personal property in an easy and convenient manner.

Re:My Impatience (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684642)

Assuming, of course that you are not just leaching. It is possible to block the upload capabilities on most torrent clients.

Re:My Impatience (2)

cdrguru (88047) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684652)

When I watch a movie or a TV episode I might watch it again in a few years if it was extremely good and memorable, but I would consider it a complete waste of my time to even consider watching most things more than once. Ever.

I am pretty sure that most people that aren't glued to a TV set watching endless reruns of Judge Judy to feel that way. I do know there are some people that can pretty much watch the same 40-minute TV episode of something three times in a row (or more) without finding it repetitous, but I think they are in the minority. For this reason, above all others, try-before-you-buy is pointless.

It is like a restaurant offering you a complete meal for free so you can see if you like today's selection. If you do, you are free to pay for another. That is pretty much a proven money-loser in the restaurant business. As it is in the entertainment business - once consumed most people don't feel the need to consume it again within the span of years.

OK, there are some fools out there that insist they are "supporting the artist" when in fact they are supporting the distribution channel. Today, with a seemingly endless set of over-35 folks that don't understand downloading, BitTorrent or anything else about the Internet Economy there are plenty of people buying CDs and DVDs at WalMart. Maybe they just have dial-up Internet access or just use computers at the library. But in the not too distant future these people will be gone and the distribution channel and artists won't be supported by anyone anymore. Certainly there are not enough people pretending to try-before-buying to keep the distribution systems going. And without massive distribution nobody is going to spend tens of millions to make a movie.

We are seeing the final act of mass distribution of entertainment. It has been a defining part of Western Culture. It will be sad when it goes, but plenty of people around the world will not be sorry to see it go. But it is going to pass on because the Internet Economy (only porn pays) doesn't leave room for it anymore.

Re:My Impatience (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684680)

dont watch the last S of Ds9 man ................just trust me ...........

just dont do it ...

Re:My Impatience (1)

Cajun Hell (725246) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684758)

I torrent but I am not a pirate.

You may not be a pirate, but you're a copyright infringer, so there is financial incentive for people to measure your type of behavior and to find you. No, not to stop you, but to get you to pay for a large settlement. If they can get you to buy the DVDs and also pay a few extra thousand for your "crime" that is a win/win for everyone.

(Well, almost everyone.)

Re:Common Sense! (1)

master_p (608214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684592)

And what makes sure that the form of distribution you ask for (basically, the plain files without any sort of protection) are not massively pirated?

I keep saying that too. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684724)

I keep saying that too. On the other hand, I keep doing it because it is free.

Say != Do

You're only fooling yourself. Everyone else can see right through you.

best solution ever (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36683964)

"The solution is apparently for content providers to 'compete with piracy and get their content out there themselves as easily and as quickly and as cheaply as possible'"
I agree. Let me rent it online right after it's theater run, instead of waiting 3 to 5 months to wait for the DVD release!
We all know the torrents are available immediately in some cases....some of us don't mind paying if we are given the chance!

Re:best solution ever (1)

jd2112 (1535857) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684246)

"The solution is apparently for content providers to 'compete with piracy and get their content out there themselves as easily and as quickly and as cheaply as possible'" I agree. Let me rent it online right after it's theater run, instead of waiting 3 to 5 months to wait for the DVD release! We all know the torrents are available immediately in some cases....some of us don't mind paying if we are given the chance!

Baby steps here, there is no way that the movie companies would ever take that big of a leap of faith. I'd be happy if they would make movies available for streaming on Netflix at the same time they are available on disk.

Re:best solution ever (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684530)

Considering it used to be 1-2 years after a movie was out in theaters that it was finally available to watch at home, I would say we are moving in the right direction. And I would rather wait to watch a DVDrip than some shaky, crappy, cam version of a movie. Those ruin the experience completely.

Re:best solution ever (1)

cdrguru (88047) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684702)

Absolutely. Kill off all theater sales and movie theaters because they are old, dirty and outmoded. Why not just release the movie on DVD at the same time as in the theater?

You do understand the only thing keeping a lot of theaters going is the fact that if you want to see the movie this year you have to go to the theater? If you are willing to wait until next year, fine, it will be out on DVD.

Just like a losing strategy in Afganistan is telling the Taliban all they have to do is wait a little longer to take over, if people knew that one week after the main theater run was over they could get the DVD they would just wait patiently. Certainly in most places that would be the end of the movie theater.

Only 33% since 2006? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36683974)

Considering that large parts of the UK have only got >2M connections since that point, and the extra interest in the internet in general, I'd have said that's actually a pretty good result.

Re:Only 33% since 2006? (1)

DanTheStone (1212500) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684126)

It's only looking at the 5 most-downloaded in each category. My question is, why look only at the top 5? Comparing download counts of the top 5 most downloaded in each category hardly seems like an accurate general measurement.

This Is Not News Of The World (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36683976)

This Is Not News Of The World (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/News-Of-The-World-This-Sunday-Last-Ever-Issue-After-Phone-Hacking-Scandal-At-Tabloid/Article/201107116026230?lpos=UK_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_16026230_News_Of_The_World%3A_This_Sunday_Last_Ever_Issue_After_Phone_Hacking_Scandal_At_Tabloid).

'internet intelligence'? (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 3 years ago | (#36683992)

I hate to break it to them, but there isn't much 'internet intelligence' out there ...

legal film uploading down 66% outside the UK (1)

smoothnorman (1670542) | more than 3 years ago | (#36683994)

errorbars! don't believe no made-up statistics without they also have made-up errorbars!

Re:legal film uploading down 66% outside the UK (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684030)

I went to an error-bar, once. ...but I left with the wrong woman.

Re:legal film uploading down 66% outside the UK (3, Funny)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684392)

...but I left with the wrong woman.

That wasn't a woman.

Re:legal film uploading down 66% outside the UK (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684660)

Hence the error.

Re:legal film uploading down 66% outside the UK (1)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684684)

That was either an ID10T or a PEBCAK error.

The solution (1, Insightful)

supertrinko (1396985) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684002)

Brilliant solution, If it's easier to get it legally, most would prefer it to illegal methods.

Re:The solution (1)

brit74 (831798) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684314)

> Brilliant solution, If it's easier to get it legally, most would prefer it to illegal methods.
Or maybe not. When you look at the music business, and consider that there are DRM-free ways to get music through iTunes and Amazon, or unlimited streaming services like Rhapsody, but then consider that per-capita, inflation-adjusted music sales have fallen by 60-70% in the past 10 years, it suggests to me that legal services are not preferred to illegal ones. (People talk about iTunes likes it's some massive monster for digital music sales, but it's actually a pretty small fraction of all music sales.) Besides, isn't there a streaming-movie service already available through NetFlix? Amazon and YouTube have video on demand for TV shows and movies.

Re:The solution (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684478)

10 years ago the industry tried to kill off the single and pushed whole album sales down everyone's throats.

Today, the fastest growing distribution method is the single and singles are cheap.

You also no longer have artificial demand created by format changes.

There are plenty of explanations for the numbers that don't require using piracy as a crutch.

Re:The solution (1)

OffaMyLawn (1885682) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684494)

NetFlix needs improvement. The delay between a movie hitting disk and being available for streaming (which I'm guessing has a lot to do with the content producers agreements) needs to go away.

I have purchased quite a bit of music off of iTunes personally, but it has been things like the Beatles ($149 for the whole collection? yeah, I can do that). Most new music isn't worth it to me anymore. I stopped pirating years ago, because I wanted to set an example to my kids that worthy content does deserve to be purchased.

Re:The solution (1)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684576)

It's a false dichotomization of the market though. It's not just legal vs. illegal, but commercial vs. free as well. Before the internet free music (aside from radio which hasn't gone anywhere) essentially didn't exist because of production and distribution costs. Now I have thousands of tracks of free-as-in-non-commercial music and more is produced all the time. This pressure along with others such as the elimination of false scarcity is driving the price of music to consumers down, and that generally means slimmer margins and less profit, per capita or otherwise. Piracy is a part of this decrease, but it is hardly the sum total.

Piracy=Market (1)

TenDollarMan (1307733) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684012)

Given that 1% of any population are criminals, the sheer size of the population of pirates tells you that the current business models are broken.

It must be true that there is a market between the current crazy prices for media, and nothing. I'd buy a "pirate bundle" off my ISP that lets me pirate my ass off, so that some royalties went the right way.

Re:Piracy=Market (1)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684076)

Isn't that pretty much exactly what broke prohibition? People just refused to obey the law because it wasn't just. (And they wanted liquor.)

I keep waiting for the government to start seeing sense. I mean, it was only 200-some years ago that we threw off a tyrannical government that wasn't interested in representing us.

Re:Piracy=Market (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684422)

Isn't that pretty much exactly what broke prohibition? People just refused to obey the law because it wasn't just. (And they wanted liquor.)

I keep waiting for the government to start seeing sense. I mean, it was only 200-some years ago that we threw off a tyrannical government that wasn't interested in representing us.

Prohibition is broken? That must be news to the prohibitionists. [whitehousedrugpolicy.gov]

Re:Piracy=Market (1)

brit74 (831798) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684252)

Indeed. And let's look at the percentage of the population who breaks traffic laws. I'd bet it's a much higher percentage than the percentage of pirates. Clearly, we need to eliminate traffic laws.

Re:Piracy=Market (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684376)

Pirating movies does not equate to lives lost as traffic laws do.
Try a better analogy.

Waaay to expensive (2)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684068)

I completely agree that the cost of movies is getting stupid. I watched Transformers 3 last night (it's pretty crap, but the sequence in the city is amazing) and two tickets cost me 18GBP.

For the 2D version.

Fortunately I have Orange Wednesdays so I get two tickets for the price of one, 9GBP and then we split the cost, so 4.50GBP, which is a bit more reasonable and what it should have cost to start with (I'm in London BTW).

I think you should be able to stream the latest releases even while they're in the cinema. For some movies I'd stream them but others I'd go to the cinema to see them on as large a screen as possible.

Transformers (3, Interesting)

improfane (855034) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684190)

I had a similar experience but with the 3D version. It was 10 GBP plus 1GBP for the glasses! Rip off.

There are sequences in that film that are really good fun. Unfortunately there is a lot of bad acting and ridiculous pro-American propaganda.

The scene that left me gawping was when the voiceover said the Autobots agreed to help the US 'save humans from themselves'. The scene showed a nuclear power plant subtitled 'Illegal Nuclear Site' with Libya flags. Very offensive.

The irony is that the film is all about freedom and yet freedoms in America are being taken away everyday (Slashdot YROs etc) Plus America supresses the freedoms of other nations too, UK, Libya, Iraq, Vietnam, Guatemala and so on.

Other than that, the action is good fun but thoughtless. I found the prisoner scene with the Eeinstein robot particularly disturbing.

Re:Transformers (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684442)

Unfortunately there is a lot of bad acting and ridiculous pro-American propaganda.

In a Hollywood action film? I'm shocked! Shocked!!

Next thing you know there will be musical numbers with lots of dancing in Bollywood Films, will nothing stop this madness?

Re:Transformers (1)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684454)

Wait... How are we suppressing the Libyans freedom at the moment? You have at least some argument for the others but last I checked we were providing at least a little support for the freedom of the Libyan people.

Re:Transformers (1)

improfane (855034) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684714)

This is offtopic but do I believe that we're in this war to support the rebels? It can't possibly be for something we want [wikipedia.org] . It [wikipedia.org] has [google.co.uk] happened [blogspot.com] once [wikipedia.org] , it will happen again [bbc.co.uk] .

Re:Transformers (1)

Idimmu Xul (204345) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684594)

The scene showed a nuclear power plant subtitled 'Illegal Nuclear Site' with Libya flags. Very offensive.

Why is this honestly offensive to anyone that isn't a whiny film critique?

Re:Waaay to expensive (1)

JMJimmy (2036122) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684324)

Honestly, if you've got a 42" or bigger at home or your own home projection it's infinitely better than going to the theatre. Besides the obvious of being able to pause to go to the bathroom and the like, every time I've gone to the theatre in the past few years some jackass has been talking, the picture quality has been horrible (about 1/3rd of the time it's out of focus because they hire minimum wage workers to run the projectors), a speaker is blown, there's crap on the screen (gummies, drinks, holes). Typically here it costs over CDN$50 for 2 people to go to the theatre if you want snacks/drink. It's just not worth it.

Re:Waaay to expensive (1)

OffaMyLawn (1885682) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684542)

I just had roughly the same experiences recently with Green Lantern. People in the theater would just not shut the fuck up, and the picture was ever so slightly out of focus, just enough to really bug me. Would much rather prefer watching movies at home.

Re:Waaay to expensive (1)

tripleevenfall (1990004) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684630)

Or, respectfully, it would cost half that much if you can sit for two hours without having to eat and drink.

Re:Waaay to expensive (1)

tripleevenfall (1990004) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684616)

If there's no profit from movie tickets there are no theaters, and thus no new movies.

Re:Waaay to expensive (1)

Rolgar (556636) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684666)

Don't give them permission to continue to drive up prices. That is don't go. I've stopped going myself, but I have more important things to spend money on.

Set the money not spent on tickets aside for a number of months/years necessary to acquire a decent home theater setup. Get the movies free at the library or start a movie club with other like minded individuals. If enough people do it, eventually the theaters will push back on the movie makers to reduce ticket prices. But as long as the makers/producers make record box offices, and the theaters continue to overcharge for the concessions at the door, things will continue to get worse.

Consider the source. (5, Informative)

olsmeister (1488789) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684086)

Envisional [envisional.com] entire business is based on helping companies find out when their stuff is being downloaded illegally. Of course their study will show that piracy is as exploding ... at about the same pace as what they're projecting for next quarter's profits.

Shocker? (1)

Tasha26 (1613349) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684108)

I was listening to that report on the radio, some of the reasons to explain this were: - faster broadband - user friendlier download sites - people not finding it wrong to download illegal content But they didn't mention how jobless people are supposed to find the money for legit content?... My question is this: Is it ok to draw a parellel between stealing a loaf of bread from a baker and downloading a pirated movie or music file?

Re:Shocker? (5, Informative)

TenDollarMan (1307733) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684294)

Lets just say that a baker has 13 loaves of bread, and I steal one.

The baker now has only a conventional dozen, and will be angry because of that, as he is now only able to sell 12, not the original 13. Loss in potential profits of about 8%.

Imagine the bread is digital, and I copy one of those loaves.

The baker still has 13 loaves, and can still sell them. Repeatedly. His anger is now because his marketplace has diminished by one. Loss in potential profits of 0.000000001%

It is still wrong, from the baker's perspective, but it's less damaging.

Re:Shocker? (1)

JMJimmy (2036122) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684412)

My question is this: Is it ok to draw a parellel between stealing a loaf of bread from a baker and downloading a pirated movie or music file?

Sorry, no. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs [wikipedia.org]

Re:Shocker? (1)

plunderscratch (2169382) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684732)

Provided you downloaded the movie in order to feed to your starving family I'm certain many judges would look leniently on such an offence and recommend a non-custodial sentence.

Solution for TV shows: (5, Interesting)

Justin1313 (1787406) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684112)

Make Bit torrents of your shows complete with commercials, I would download that. And you can track how many downloads for ad revenue.

And it's all coming down the same cable (4, Insightful)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684114)

Dear Virgin Media. You (try to) charge me approximately £4-£5 for a 24 hour window of opportunity to stream a bunch of bits to the cable box over there. Or I can use the exact same cable to stream much the same bunch of bits to the network card and hard drive over here, and then I can decode them as many times as I like, indefinitely, at an extra cost of £0.

I'm not saying that I'd actually do either of these things, but you really aren't making it easy for me to pick the former.

No, no, no! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684130)

Pirates have repeatedly assured us piracy rates are not only at their all time historic low, but that its been at a steady decline for years now. After all, stealing shit (not paying producers for what you consume) never hurts anyone - except of course for everyone.

Re:No, no, no! (5, Informative)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684414)

Yup, there's been a marked decline in the amount of money Hollywood is making over the last decade and a half. They're really hurting now. Oh wait, no there hasn't: http://www.the-numbers.com/market/ [the-numbers.com] .

We need to sort this out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684212)

What need to happen here is that we need to stop making films illegal.

Universal Pictures / Lovefilm dispute (3, Insightful)

TheophileEscargot (309117) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684268)

I wonder if the Universal Pictures / Lovefilm dispute [wikipedia.org] has had an impact. Since November 2009 Universal Pictures have refused to make their movies available to most online DVD-rental services. So you want to see one of their movies you have to pirate it, buy it, or switch to Blockbuster.

Please give us a legal download service. (4, Insightful)

What the Frag (951841) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684282)

I live in Germany and I admire many BBC productions. The problem is, after many years of the industry 'fighting piracy', they are still missing the obvious.

Yes, I consider myself a "TV show pirate". Why am I pirating? Let's say I want to watch the newest Doctor Who. There are a few ways to watch it:

- legally: Visit UK: Expensive.
- legally: Buy a huge satellite dish and watch/record it. Expensive and complicated, not possible anywhere.
- legally: Wait month for DVD.
- legally: Wait 5 years for any TV station to pick the show up again and show it in Germany with bad synchronization.
- somewhat legally: watch it on BBCs iplayer via Proxy: Complicated to set up, often slow
- probably illegally: download it from Filehoster/Newsgroup: easiest and cheapest, also fast.

So why am I pirating: I'm always picking the fastest, most comfortable and maybe the cheapest way. But I would pay for it, as I would pay for a filehoster or newsgroup provider.

BBC and others: If you want me to stop piracy, please make a platform that
- is available everywhere where I have internet access
- that provides TV shows or movies to an affordable price, with original audio
- that provides TV shows in decent quality (720p), unencrypted
- that provides TV shows immediately after being screened.

I will be your customer.

Re:Please give us a legal download service. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684430)

- that provides TV shows in decent quality (720p), unencrypted

If only, iPlayers quality is horrid. The clarity might be high but the quality of even their 1080 encodings is a complete shambles. Digital artifacts everywhere. Personally I just watch the standard stream and save the bandwidth.

Re:Please give us a legal download service. (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684504)

BBC stuff is horrible when it comes to pricing. They are absolute dead last on my shopping list when it comes to content. There's just too much other cheaper stuff out there to get my attention. Now I have started watching some of their stuff on Netflix because it's there and it's cheap enough. If not for their prima donna pricing, I would have a lot more of their stuff (bought and paid for even).

Re:Please give us a legal download service. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684728)

Yeah and Nash Bridges Season 0-X too! (Even on VHS it was a cool series)

netflix + uk = win (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684352)

the uk needs netflix to come over ASAP...

the reason so many people do it is because there is no competing method... so netflix and other competitors need to enter the market and advertise what they are doing to convince people their services are superior

people will go for $15-$20 PPV at home for movies (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684370)

people will go for $15-$20 PPV at home for movies at home same day as theater.

but $30 is to high.

What else you gonna do? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684398)

It's the unemployment, innit?

What else you gonna do?

Envisional... (4, Insightful)

Heed00 (1473203) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684470)

It's not like this company has a vested interest in the numbers going up -- oh no of course not:

http://www.envisional.com/ [envisional.com]

Envisional’s business is built around unique, patented search technologies and a superb team of experienced analysts. We use this powerful combination to help corporations protect themselves and their customers from fraud, fakes, piracy and online brand abuse.

Horrible misunderstanding (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684482)

I'm sorry, people that is not the solution.

The solution is that our businesses are dying and the only solution is for the government to regulate with increasingly harsh copyright laws because without it the creators (some of whom are children, even!) will suffer a horrible, painful, tortured existence where their product is ripped off shamelessly by thousands of immoral pirates who are set on taking freedom away from artists.

Please, think of the children!

yuo fai7 1t. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684506)

arroganc3 was

Better solution? (1)

mmcuh (1088773) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684562)

Maybe the solution is to just not care about it? Are the movie producers really gaining anything by chasing filesharers and buying parliamentarians? And aren't they still making loads of money, even with today's massive filesharing?

Change the law, It ain't piracy, it's publicity, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684570)

it's a bad law, get rid of it, why is this "film industry" dragging down the new post human apocalypse music industry? I want my grind core comming out of a meat grinder welded to a tree-chipper, damn you lied about the jet packs, and the house-cleanin robots, so I don't trust ya.

Most bands would be happy to have their videos aired everywhere. It ain't piracy it's publicity, which leads to touring and events.
At the same time most bands actually want to pay to have plastic pressed to get their discs out as well as other swag, lovingly smooshed guitars and whatever else ends up on auction. Maybe not as good as cameras as Hollywood has, but I bet more cameras (TM) are pointed at bands then at films when you add them up. Some band's song ends up on a track for their Hollywood movies, and I don't hear cry foul!

MySpace actually has a chance now to progress with the new owners, or they can toast it. There's a lot of bands on MySpace, now it's not hooked to the WSJ, or Murdoc, nor is it made up of fake facebook accounts. So there might be some freedom, possibly. I don't know the owners though. I'd hate to see a migration to blogger. Crap... All Myspace has to do is keep the directory structure but upgrade their underlying hosting platform to something free that kicks ass like nginx and drupal or something. Or their own code. Get love from USA, Get love from UK. You know I am right.

Come on, the problem is simple, you say no, fix the problem, and continue on. Nobody said it will be simple, you simply think pick up where the gaps are, judge for yourself, create a plan, and fill it in and move on.

Maybe if you turn off the tv, you can hear me.

I didn't know it was wrong! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36684580)

Oh my goodness! All I did was put the negative in the carrier and turn on the cold lamp. I had no idea that sticking a sheet of Ilford VC paper under the lens was illegal!!! Do you think the court will be lenient if expose only a 4x6" section, instead of the whole 8x10" sheet? Is contact printing okay, though? So many questions! Where do I find a good film attorney?

of course it is (1)

Nihn (1863500) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684676)

the new Harry Potter just came out, it will be back to normal about 2 months after the dvd is released, untill then it will be an "epidemic of piracy" for the film industry. FUN FACT: My downloading went down by %100 after I saw Avatar...that literally killed my faith in movies and the industry. I rather watch paint dry, the outcome isn't always obvious from the first 10 minutes and has a better plot than anything released in the past 10 years...in my opinion that is.

Why when suing is so much easier... (1)

madhatter256 (443326) | more than 3 years ago | (#36684692)

Why try and compete with piracy? How can the film industry compete with something that's free? Charge less? How much less can you get? Readily available?

Why work harder when you can easily sue many people and file them under "john/jane doe" lawsuits like here in the US and extort them out of thousands of dollars?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?