32% Of All U.S. Adults Watch Pirated Content

[AK0tA]

I know a guy who's very religious and he's typically pushing the idea you should be a law abiding citizen and do good in the world. He's always posting religious stuff on social media and always going on about how you should help others, be righteous, etc, etc... Now, I'm also somewhat religious (I go to church, pray, etc.). So I'm not bashing being religious by any means. The thing is, this guy has it in his head it's perfectly fine to download dozens of pirated movies, TV shows, etc... He even encourages people to do it and doesn't think there is anything at all wrong with it. When you get down to it, stealing is stealing. (Although I'm sure a lot of people don't see it that way.) I'm just mentioning this because here you have a guy who's your average joe, and who is clearly a decent human being... but for some reason he has it in his head that downloading movies illegally is perfectly okay and acceptable. Just goes to show the outlook people have on this sort of thing.

Hence the big problem with religion, I am very anti religious however I am a Christian. Our churches are way to full of liturgy that have nothing to do with the meaning of Jesus teachings.
The end of the day wrong is wrong no matter the title we give it, it is still wrong. Today church has become more of a click for perfect people who "do no wrong" when in fact it should be a place full of sinners in need of healing.

 

[Guarana [BAWLS]]

I pirate stuff.

Mostly things that I can't watch elsewhere easily. I also go out with the GF at least once a month to the movies, and pay for netflix and other services.

If my options are: Pay 3-400$ for a TV show's DVDs, Pirate it, or Not Watch? Well, Hello VPN, and Bit Torrent!

 

[DocSavage]

I pirated a couple episodes of Sherlock to catch up with my friends and watch the season finale on PBS - this was after watching the first 3 seasons on Netflix.
But I also recently bought a set of Star Wars blurays for over $100.
So my moral code is against pirating movies, but I consider TV series as a grey area.

I don't think these anti-piracy groups will be happy unless we're all penniless because like Guarana mentions, some of these series are exhorbitantly expensive.

 

[lcpiper]

When you have laws that are unfair, you're going to have mass disobedience. The DMCA is one of those laws, and it's pretty much agreed upon by the vast majority of the population that it was only created to enrich one group, over another. Like traffic laws that drivers see as simply recommendations, the copyright laws are currently seen as ways that the content owning corporations use to get rich by finding creative ways to take money from the rest of us. Technicically I'm a pirate because I downloaded songs in digital format. Doesn't matter that I own the LP's, cassettes and CD's of the same songs and VHS and DVD copies of the same movies that I found digital versions of to download. To the MPAA and the RIAA, I'm a theif because they didn't get to charge me every time, as to them, each version is a different seperate sellable item in and of itself.

Piracy is close to 100%. The MPAA and RIAA see every instance as lost revanue that they should be paid for.

It's kind of like when we were kids; one yells because they don't want the other one looking at them, as if the sight of themselves is their property and they get to choose who can see them, or if the viewers should have to pay to look. Actually, it sounds more like something that Apple would dream up.

Greed gets into people's souls, and once in, they will never let it go.

I disagree almost acrossed the board here.

1st, You claim "the fast majority" people disobey the laws around the DMCA because they are unfair. I'd say the vast majority of people don't know a damned thing about the DMCA and that it really comes down to people just doing whatever the fuck they want to if they think they can get away with it. Look at ChadD above, he'll pay for content, but only if it's good enough to pay for at a price he thinks is fair. But if the price is too high or the content is only good enough to watch, but not to pay for, he'll pirate it instead. Sorry ChadD, but that is how I understand your comments.

I am not one of those people that believes that obeying the law is optional. I don't believe that we all get to choose which laws we will obey and which we think are unfair and can ignore............. Not when we have the power to change those laws ourselves and we do have that power. Some people think that they do not have this power. Perhaps it's because they really don't have enough that agree with them or they are too damned lazy to try and do it themselves, whatever.

But I do know this. The people of this country are enough to make change happen despite the very best efforts of the rich and greedy. I know because I have seen it. If the DMCA became reality it's because the people allowed it to happen because the people could have stopped it if they really gave enough of a damn to do so. So now it's law, and we have people who break that law, and there are people who pay for their disobedience.

There are very reasonable alternatives to piracy. You do stupid things you win stupid prizes. Go be ChadD or any of the thousands like him or worse and see how it turns out. But you do not own the rights to content that you don't own the rights to. If content right's holder charges for it you can pay their price or not, no one is forcing you to watch it. You sure don't have a right to watch it. So take your chances, it's your choice, but the law is the law and your wishes alone will not change it.

Obey the Law, Change the Law, or get caught and pay for your choices. But blaming the rich for it is futile.

 

[DocSavage]

...I am not one of those people that believes that obeying the law is optional. I don't believe that we all get to choose which laws we will obey and which we think are unfair and can ignore............. Not when we have the power to change those laws ourselves and we do have that power. Some people think that they do not have this power. Perhaps it's because they really don't have enough that agree with them or they are too damned lazy to try and do it themselves, whatever...

I'll just put this here: http://www.dumblaws.com/
And in particular for Missouri where I live: "It is illegal to have oral sex."

 

[Shotglass01]

I disagree almost acrossed the board here.I am not one of those people that believes that obeying the law is optional. I don't believe that we all get to choose which laws we will obey and which we think are unfair and can ignore............. Not when we have the power to change those laws ourselves and we do have that power. Some people think that they do not have this power. Perhaps it's because they really don't have enough that agree with them or they are too damned lazy to try and do it themselves, whatever.

But I do know this. The people of this country are enough to make change happen despite the very best efforts of the rich and greedy. I know because I have seen it. If the DMCA became reality it's because the people allowed it to happen because the people could have stopped it if they really gave enough of a damn to do so. So now it's law, and we have people who break that law, and there are people who pay for their disobedience.

But blaming the rich for it is futile.

There's no way on this earth you could have lived your entire life without breaking a law. You had to have just by living in the US. I agree with your point about blaming the rich, but you give the typical consumer way too much credit. They don't even know how jail locked they are with this stuff. I gotta go with Doc's dumblaws.

 

[lcpiper]

I'll just put this here: http://www.dumblaws.com/
And in particular for Missouri where I live: "It is illegal to have oral sex."

I live in Sierra Vista Arizona and I don't see any of those laws that would have a particular impact on me or that I would have a problem violating, dumb or not.

 

[lilbabycat]

I live in Sierra Vista Arizona and I don't see any of those laws that would have a particular impact on me or that I would have a problem violating, dumb or not.

You sure about that?

>You may not have more than two dildos in a house.

 

[lcpiper]

There's no way on this earth you could have lived your entire life without breaking a law. You had to have just by living in the US. I agree with your point about blaming the rich, but you give the typical consumer way too much credit. They don't even know how jail locked they are with this stuff. I gotta go with Doc's dumblaws.

I didn't say I have never broken a law. And if I get caught I thoroughly intend to pay my speeding ticket, actually it will probably be "wasting Finite Resources". Although I speed, I try and keep it reasonable enough that I won't get pulled over. But you can bet when the cop asks for my license and registration I say "Yes sir" and I am respectful of the Office and you will not hear me trying to talk him out of the ticket cause everyone else is doing the same thing, that the law is stupid and is only on the books to make more money for the rich fat cats. No sir you will not hear me take that approach.

And I'll leave you guys with this link;
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2792/are-those-weird-laws-you-hear-about-for-real

 

[nightfly]

I am not one of those people that believes that obeying the law is optional.

Well, apparently you do, because:

I didn't say I have never broken a law. And if I get caught I thoroughly intend to pay my speeding ticket, actually it will probably be "wasting Finite Resources". Although I speed, I try and keep it reasonable .

So apparently it is ok to break the law, but only you're allowed to, because you can justify it, see, because when YOU do it, it's 'reasonable'. Right. You sound like every other self rightious person.

 

[lcpiper]

Well, apparently you do, because:

So apparently it is ok to break the law, but only you're allowed to, because you can justify it, see, because when YOU do it, it's 'reasonable'. Right. You sound like every other self rightious person.

No I do not.

Like anyone, I can do wrong, and be wrong.

What I can't do is claim that I am not wrong because others are wrong as well. I can't claim that my wrong isn't wrong because the law is wrong and it's just there to make someone money.

 

[DocSavage]

Well, apparently you do, because:

So apparently it is ok to break the law, but only you're allowed to, because you can justify it, see, because when YOU do it, it's 'reasonable'. Right. You sound like every other self rightious person.

It was probably a typo. Though this law is a bit concerning: "When being attacked by a criminal or burglar, you may only protect yourself with the same weapon that the other person posseses."

 

[DocSavage]

No I do not.

Like anyone, I can do wrong, and be wrong.

What I can't do is claim that I am not wrong because others are wrong as well. I can't claim that my wrong isn't wrong because the law is wrong and it's just there to make someone money.

Exactly this. Break a law if you want, but be prepared to pay the consequences. Kind of like the old TV series 24 where Jack Bauer would be torturing terrorists for the greater good and he eventually had to run from the law because of it.

 

[lcpiper]

It was probably a typo. Though this law is a bit concerning: "When being attacked by a criminal or burglar, you may only protect yourself with the same weapon that the other person posseses."

From my reading that one is on the books but not enforced.

 

[Design1stcode2nd]

"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, yeah, yeah" A billion internet dollars to the first one who names that theme song.

 

[nightfly]

"Don't do the crime if you can't do the time, yeah, yeah" A billion internet dollars to the first one who names that theme song.

It's from Baretta. Sparrow something.

 

[lcpiper]

Exactly this. Break a law if you want, but be prepared to pay the consequences. Kind of like the old TV series 24 where Jack Bauer would be torturing terrorists for the greater good and he eventually had to run from the law because of it.

Exactly. The difference is about being willing to accept responsibility for one's actions. Some will, some won't. Some will come up with the craziest excuses why they shouldn't have to be responsible for what they have done. Even worse, sometimes others accept it.

I was Sergeant of the Guard one night at Ft. Benning, GA. I was responsible for maintaining a guard force to protect the motor pool at night. We had a weird cold front role through and my guards didn't have the best cold weather gear but we had a 55 Gallon drum and fire wood and we had authorization to use it to keep warm. I posted a young kid at his guard post and told him all the stuff he should already know, and I told him not to fall asleep. If he was cold he should start a fire in the barrel and if he got too sleepy to call me I would come down, don't fall asleep.

After an hour or so I went down to check on him, he was asleep. I could tell he had been standing in this sand-bag lined trench that runs around the fence, bored and cold, he started sitting and then just fell asleep. He had all his equipment on, his weapon's belt was still on right same with his helmet. I got some lighter fluid and squirted some on the sand-bag behind his legs and lit it on fire. I watched and soon he started moving his legs cause I know the back of his legs was getting warm, then I started yelling for him to "wake up, your on fire !" He jumped up and was slapping at his legs and then he slowed down and realized what had happened. I'm sure the burning sand-bag was a clue. And I looked at him and I told him again, "Do not fall asleep". I came back later and he was wide awake with a 2x4 poking at the fire and I was satisfied he'd learned his lesson. No report, no need to write him up.

Then I post my next guard, this one was a little older, a Specialist not a Private. I told him all the same things I told the first one. He asked if he could drive his car down there so he could have his snacks and water and I said yes. I was never about making shit more miserable just to make it more miserable. So an hour or so goes by, I go check on my guard. He's in the seat of his car with all his gear off and has a pillow and a fucking blanket for fucks sake. I wake his ass up, I put him out on his post, I am pissed. I can't let this shit go, this turd "planned to break his orders" right from the start. He didn't fall asleep, he went to sleep on purpose abandoning his post.

So I report him, and because I reported him, I know had to report the first kid too. I had to pass on my observations and trust that my leadership would recognize the difference the same as I had.

You know what happened? They punished me, I never should have allowed that Specialist access to his vehicle and it was my fault that he abandoned his post, the temptation was unreasonable. This Specialist had already been boarded for promotion to Sergeant, he not only should have known better he was supposed to be disciplined enough to know what is right and wrong and not be shittier then a Private.

No good deed ...............................

 

[lilbabycat]

moral of the story: You were a shitty NCO

 

[maclem8223]

moral of the story: You were a shitty NCO

Agreed. I'm sure his POV was not supposed to be there. Probably an order or something stating that but laws are not optional and stuff......so. And of course the NCO is the one that gets punished. He is the one that fucked up.

 

[opfreak]

Piracy proves there's a market for content that needs to be made available at a reasonable price within a reasonable time frame. It means, if you're a theater, step up and make it a premium experience as such that I want to go see it. Taking out 20 minutes of previews would be a step in the right direction. And stop equating piracy with lost revenue as many watch content they never intended to buy.



I think it is too. It's not my fault the studios, content creators, license holders, and distributors can't get it together to take full advantage of the technology. No outdated law is going to change my mind. Yes, they need compensation. So they need to work with the technology to get it. Trying to make me feel bad for their failure isn't going to work out well for them.

hogwash.

For the most part privacy now proves people are cheap ass bastards that want high quality programing without paying for it. every single time a barrier is removed or lowered the pro-piracy crowd moves the goal posts.

 

[opfreak]

When you have laws that are unfair, you're going to have mass disobedience. The DMCA is one of those laws, and it's pretty much agreed upon by the vast majority of the population that it was only created to enrich one group, over another. Like traffic laws that drivers see as simply recommendations, the copyright laws are currently seen as ways that the content owning corporations use to get rich by finding creative ways to take money from the rest of us. Technicically I'm a pirate because I downloaded songs in digital format. Doesn't matter that I own the LP's, cassettes and CD's of the same songs and VHS and DVD copies of the same movies that I found digital versions of to download. To the MPAA and the RIAA, I'm a theif because they didn't get to charge me every time, as to them, each version is a different seperate sellable item in and of itself.

Piracy is close to 100%. The MPAA and RIAA see every instance as lost revanue that they should be paid for.

It's kind of like when we were kids; one yells because they don't want the other one looking at them, as if the sight of themselves is their property and they get to choose who can see them, or if the viewers should have to pay to look. Actually, it sounds more like something that Apple would dream up.

Greed gets into people's souls, and once in, they will never let it go.

are not the people that download and pirate material without every paying for it greedy as well?

 

[nightfly]

For the most part privacy now proves people are cheap ass bastards that want high quality programing without paying for it. every single time a barrier is removed or lowered the pro-piracy crowd moves the goal posts.

How so? What barriers have been removed/lowered? Movies still cost a ton. TV now costs to watch it and we still get the commercials, even more of them, as the providers work very hard to make cutting the cord ever more difficult, while going back on their marketing promises in the fine print/fast talk. They rig the system constantly (triple play? Sure. Landline $30, internet $30, TV $30. Oh, you don't want the Landline or TV? Ok, that'll be $85 for the internet.).As far as music, for 45 years it was, want a great song? Sure, just buy these other 13 pieces of crap and you can have it. Now today, we don't even have 'album cuts'.....mostly because most of the songs suck anyway. Great; now that they've finally started selling music at a decent price again, there's not much worth buying. Besides, whenever they do get around to making something I DO want to buy, I'll (and mulitmillions of others, too) will just take that song, and give them back one of their crap songs (delete it from my library). If they think that song is worth the money, good, THEY can buy it back.

are not the people that download and pirate material without every paying for it greedy as well?

While I'm sure you could look at it that way, remember that it's most often a response to being intentionally ripped off by someone who['s charging you way more than an item is worth simply because they can. How would you feel if one company purchased all the bakeries as well as monopolizing all sources of flour, and started charging $50 for a loaf of bread? (things like that have been done, back in the old west during the gold rushes). While you could say that they could simply do without the song/movie/bread/whatever, our country's creation was a response to getting ripped off by the British (not just taxes, but heavy handed regulation keeping all the land in name of the king). So there's a precedent of sorts for not putting up with it.

There will always be some who steal. But most are willing to pay a fair price for a decent product. When we get ripped off, however, that changes the game.

 

[dgz]

More like:

Select the option that best describes your method of watching movies:

a) Netflix
b) hulu
c) cable tv provider
d) movie theaters
e) free streaming or downloaded content
d) other

so they probably put E and D and grouped them as pirates.

p) pirate bay

 

[opfreak]

How so? What barriers have been removed/lowered? Movies still cost a ton. TV now costs to watch it and we still get the commercials, even more of them, as the providers work very hard to make cutting the cord ever more difficult, while going back on their marketing promises in the fine print/fast talk. They rig the system constantly (triple play? Sure. Landline $30, internet $30, TV $30. Oh, you don't want the Landline or TV? Ok, that'll be $85 for the internet.).As far as music, for 45 years it was, want a great song? Sure, just buy these other 13 pieces of crap and you can have it. Now today, we don't even have 'album cuts'.....mostly because most of the songs suck anyway. Great; now that they've finally started selling music at a decent price again, there's not much worth buying. Besides, whenever they do get around to making something I DO want to buy, I'll (and mulitmillions of others, too) will just take that song, and give them back one of their crap songs (delete it from my library). If they think that song is worth the money, good, THEY can buy it back.


While I'm sure you could look at it that way, remember that it's most often a response to being intentionally ripped off by someone who['s charging you way more than an item is worth simply because they can. How would you feel if one company purchased all the bakeries as well as monopolizing all sources of flour, and started charging $50 for a loaf of bread? (things like that have been done, back in the old west during the gold rushes). While you could say that they could simply do without the song/movie/bread/whatever, our country's creation was a response to getting ripped off by the British (not just taxes, but heavy handed regulation keeping all the land in name of the king). So there's a precedent of sorts for not putting up with it.

There will always be some who steal. But most are willing to pay a fair price for a decent product. When we get ripped off, however, that changes the game.

You will rationalize whatever thievery you do no matter what is said.

ITunes you can buy a single song, similar on amazon. Good luck doing that 45 years ago in your golden age of music. You always have access to OTA TV still paid for by commercials. You always have a choice. There is no right that you have to watch, listen to, or enjoy the work of others just because you exist. The people that create that work have the right to distribute it how they see fit. And they tend to do so to maximize their earnings. Is that not something you do? Do you work for free? Do you voluntary take pay cuts so that you don't feel so Greedy?

DVD/Blu-rays too much junk before the movie starts playing, ok now there are a ton of digital download options. What's your excuse now? Oh wait they are charging too much. Who are you to decide what too much is?

Also if the music today sucks, why listen to it? Why pirate it? Is it because you actually find it enjoyable, but just want to rage like an old fart about how back in my day music was good?

And finally no one is getting ripped off. Because no one is required to buy, or listen, or to watch anything. You have a choice, you can chose not to listen to this crap music, or watch crap movies and tv shows, and guess what then you don't pay. Its that simple.

But that's not what you want, you want a hand out, you want a freebie, you want people to work to create something but then not get paid for it. Or just not so much, because you determine how much is too much.

 

[nightfly]

And finally no one is getting ripped off. Because no one is required to buy, or listen, or to watch anything.

Ahhh, there it is. The 'pay my price or don't buy it' response that every merchant believes is perfectly fair, even if they just sold the same item to a thousand people for half the price, but for the targeted consumer, they feel justified in doubling it and think that's perfectly OK. That's not a rip off, is it, simply because that particular customer has the option of doing without? This is best seen in the pharmaceutical industry; patients always have the option of 'doing without' and dying, so jacking up the cost of a pill 750% is perfectly justified, and legal though, so that makes it perfectly OK. Free market and all that.

What I'm saying, is that sellers know the difference between right and wrong, and when they go ahead and do wrong to others, they can expect others to return the same type of behavior. The MPAA, RIAA, the publishing industry both hardcopy and software, well, pretty much any one who sells stuff, all know when they're behaving fairly to their customers and when they're not. When they don't, the market will respond in kind. You simply cannot cheat people and expect them to like it, and you can also expect a backlash from that type of behavior.

 

[opfreak]

Ahhh, there it is. The 'pay my price or don't buy it' response that every merchant believes is perfectly fair, even if they just sold the same item to a thousand people for half the price, but for the targeted consumer, they feel justified in doubling it and think that's perfectly OK. That's not a rip off, is it, simply because that particular customer has the option of doing without? This is best seen in the pharmaceutical industry; patients always have the option of 'doing without' and dying, so jacking up the cost of a pill 750% is perfectly justified, and legal though, so that makes it perfectly OK. Free market and all that.

What I'm saying, is that sellers know the difference between right and wrong, and when they go ahead and do wrong to others, they can expect others to return the same type of behavior. The MPAA, RIAA, the publishing industry both hardcopy and software, well, pretty much any one who sells stuff, all know when they're behaving fairly to their customers and when they're not. When they don't, the market will respond in kind. You simply cannot cheat people and expect them to like it, and you can also expect a backlash from that type of behavior.

So now you are comparing music to drugs?


You cannot cheat someone that has a choice to buy your product.

 

[Wrench]

That number is way higher if you account for porn

 

[nightfly]

So now you are comparing music to drugs? You cannot cheat someone that has a choice to buy your product.

Oh. You only want to discuss the theft of music. Not why it's done. Got it.

 

[Rysen]

It's interesting how much time people spend criticizing and shaming each other for the so call "stealing of digital content" (piracy) done by the average content consumer. They all ignore that the average consumer that might fall in the category of pirate, has an internet bill, paid for his computer, pays for content from the Hollywood industry and on top of that has to regularly discuss a wrong bill sent by the company who doesn't give a shit if you are mad after you had to spend an hour on the phone solving the issue with the bill (In fact many times steals money from its users by sending bills with mistakes that somehow always benefit the company). Specifically the fact that throughout the years these industries have being charged with multiple lawsuits from stealing and deceiving people. In fact industries like Hollywood and companies like Comcast and At&t have been accused of monopoly and other crimes multiple times and while they have paid large sums of money to certain individuals, they have never paid a single cent to their consumer base that is more affected by all this. (At&t did pay once, but there are plenty of instance where they use extrajudicial settlements to escape trial or only a very small group of people obtain payment for something that affected many consumers.) Also these are the same companies that are selling(or contributing, to them it has the same outcome) your private information to the goverment without your permission.

The excuse that stealing is something wrong damaging content creators is bullshit. The first people damaging content creators are the same corporations through low wages and underpaid employees as well as outsourcing.The type of Piracy that is significant (popular movies, music, shows, software) always affect corporate headquarters of large corporations and is never a problem for small scale content creators. The companies waste thousands of dollars in fake propaganda that makes people think that by using piracy to obtain content they lowering the salaries of content creators, when it is widely known that companies lower salaries at will weather they are doing good on sales or not, because wealth distribution is not a concept the companies that support anti-piracy acts care about.

The best part is that the consumer doesn't have a choice because neither Hollywood nor internet/cable companies have competition in many parts of the U.S. and they are often in agreement to keep content at the same price. What I am trying to get at is that for some reason all the bullshit that the companies do and have done throughout the years are okay but piracy is wrong because legislation says so. Well interestingly enough these corporations spend millions of dollars every year in large political campaign contributions to the people who write the laws, fully aware that this will eventually lead to laws that benefit them.Who said that because some legislation exist it is right? I believe cable companies should not have a monopoly on the market and I should have more than two options at the same exact price for internet or TV service, but many people don't seem to agree with me and elect senators and congressman that make rules that allow these companies to cheat me out of my money and also cheat the content creators by paying them very low wages compare to the large profit they make.

Since for most people leaving the country where they were raised and spent so much of their time contributing, is not feasible, what can be done? What are the options for someone who thinks that the power these companies have should be broken down so that there could be a more competitive market and they would have options of a wider rage of content at competitive prices? And thus stopping organized corporate crime. If no legislative or relevant social movement is in agreement with you about these corporations there are very little options. In fact only two options,1: accept how things are and follow the rules even if these rules are made to screw you over and you believe they are unjust. Or 2: find ways around it like large corporations due with their lawyers and funding of political campaigns in order to keep charging people ridiculous amounts. I have many times opted for 1 but I know a lot of people who opt for number 2 and respect them for doing so. If your religious text says not to steal ever, make-sure it also includes a disclaimer saying: even if companies are fucking you over and you have no other choice.

I know a lot of people love the "you wouldn't steal a car" analogy because is what the anti-piracy propaganda campaigns have pushed. Well I think cars are a great example. In my city thanks to powerful lobbying and campaign contributions there are many legislation that benefit the use of cars and roads over expanding the public transportation sector, to a point that public transportation is a luxury compared to owning a car (in the long run). While I have protested and voted against all these ridiculous politicians that are pushing legislation that benefit the automotive industry in my city, they seem to always win. So if you were to ask me. If I could download an illegally leaked model of a car and print it to real life at no expenses, would I do it? Absolutely! I would do anything in my power to go against the companies that are investing so much money into politicians so they can make public transportation bad enough to force everyone to use cars and have corrupted the system so much that is impossible for average people to make a significant change to legislation without creating total chaos in the city.

In ideal world should people pirate? No! In the world we live today? Its the Robin Hood dilemma, you are stealing from those who already stole from you, so its up to the individual and shaming anyone for it is wrong.



TLDR: The "it's illegal" excuse is a very weak argument against piracy, simply because most (if not all) of the corporations that lobby to make piracy a serious crime are involved in monopoly, oligarchy, shady business, organized corporate crime, often lose or reach settlements in court and bribe politicians to pass legislation that benefits their earnings and help keep consumers paying ridiculous prices for crappy content. Simply because there is no other choice.

Note:If you don't believe me that most media you watch comes from this crime filled industry look up all of Comcast (who alone owns a large portion of Hollywood and news channels as well as internet) political contributions, lawsuit, and their large control over media and the barriers they have set for independent media (the fight against net neutrality being one of the biggest ones).

 

[Shotglass01]

hogwash.

For the most part privacy now proves people are cheap ass bastards that want high quality programing without paying for it. every single time a barrier is removed or lowered the pro-piracy crowd moves the goal posts.

Cool, please keep paying for overpriced content and add in commercials. It's appreciated.

 

[opfreak]

Cool, please keep paying for overpriced content and add in commercials. It's appreciated.

Do you watch said content without paying for it?

Whats forcing you to watch?

 

[opfreak]

It's interesting how much time people spend criticizing and shaming each other for the so call "stealing of digital content" (piracy) done by the average content consumer. They all ignore that the average consumer that might fall in the category of pirate, has an internet bill, paid for his computer, pays for content from the Hollywood industry and on top of that has to regularly discuss a wrong bill sent by the company who doesn't give a shit if you are mad after you had to spend an hour on the phone solving the issue with the bill (In fact many times steals money from its users by sending bills with mistakes that somehow always benefit the company). Specifically the fact that throughout the years these industries have being charged with multiple lawsuits from stealing and deceiving people. In fact industries like Hollywood and companies like Comcast and At&t have been accused of monopoly and other crimes multiple times and while they have paid large sums of money to certain individuals, they have never paid a single cent to their consumer base that is more affected by all this. (At&t did pay once, but there are plenty of instance where they use extrajudicial settlements to escape trial or only a very small group of people obtain payment for something that affected many consumers.) Also these are the same companies that are selling(or contributing, to them it has the same outcome) your private information to the goverment without your permission.

The excuse that stealing is something wrong damaging content creators is bullshit. The first people damaging content creators are the same corporations through low wages and underpaid employees as well as outsourcing.The type of Piracy that is significant (popular movies, music, shows, software) always affect corporate headquarters of large corporations and is never a problem for small scale content creators. The companies waste thousands of dollars in fake propaganda that makes people think that by using piracy to obtain content they lowering the salaries of content creators, when it is widely known that companies lower salaries at will weather they are doing good on sales or not, because wealth distribution is not a concept the companies that support anti-piracy acts care about.

The best part is that the consumer doesn't have a choice because neither Hollywood nor internet/cable companies have competition in many parts of the U.S. and they are often in agreement to keep content at the same price. What I am trying to get at is that for some reason all the bullshit that the companies do and have done throughout the years are okay but piracy is wrong because legislation says so. Well interestingly enough these corporations spend millions of dollars every year in large political campaign contributions to the people who write the laws, fully aware that this will eventually lead to laws that benefit them.Who said that because some legislation exist it is right? I believe cable companies should not have a monopoly on the market and I should have more than two options at the same exact price for internet or TV service, but many people don't seem to agree with me and elect senators and congressman that make rules that allow these companies to cheat me out of my money and also cheat the content creators by paying them very low wages compare to the large profit they make.

Since for most people leaving the country where they were raised and spent so much of their time contributing, is not feasible, what can be done? What are the options for someone who thinks that the power these companies have should be broken down so that there could be a more competitive market and they would have options of a wider rage of content at competitive prices? And thus stopping organized corporate crime. If no legislative or relevant social movement is in agreement with you about these corporations there are very little options. In fact only two options,1: accept how things are and follow the rules even if these rules are made to screw you over and you believe they are unjust. Or 2: find ways around it like large corporations due with their lawyers and funding of political campaigns in order to keep charging people ridiculous amounts. I have many times opted for 1 but I know a lot of people who opt for number 2 and respect them for doing so. If your religious text says not to steal ever, make-sure it also includes a disclaimer saying: even if companies are fucking you over and you have no other choice.

I know a lot of people love the "you wouldn't steal a car" analogy because is what the anti-piracy propaganda campaigns have pushed. Well I think cars are a great example. In my city thanks to powerful lobbying and campaign contributions there are many legislation that benefit the use of cars and roads over expanding the public transportation sector, to a point that public transportation is a luxury compared to owning a car (in the long run). While I have protested and voted against all these ridiculous politicians that are pushing legislation that benefit the automotive industry in my city, they seem to always win. So if you were to ask me. If I could download an illegally leaked model of a car and print it to real life at no expenses, would I do it? Absolutely! I would do anything in my power to go against the companies that are investing so much money into politicians so they can make public transportation bad enough to force everyone to use cars and have corrupted the system so much that is impossible for average people to make a significant change to legislation without creating total chaos in the city.

In ideal world should people pirate? No! In the world we live today? Its the Robin Hood dilemma, you are stealing from those who already stole from you, so its up to the individual and shaming anyone for it is wrong.



TLDR: The "it's illegal" excuse is a very weak argument against piracy, simply because most (if not all) of the corporations that lobby to make piracy a serious crime are involved in monopoly, oligarchy, shady business, organized corporate crime, often lose or reach settlements in court and bribe politicians to pass legislation that benefits their earnings and help keep consumers paying ridiculous prices for crappy content. Simply because there is no other choice.

Note:If you don't believe me that most media you watch comes from this crime filled industry look up all of Comcast (who alone owns a large portion of Hollywood and news channels as well as internet) political contributions, lawsuit, and their large control over media and the barriers they have set for independent media (the fight against net neutrality being one of the biggest ones).

how has someone making a movie stolen anything from you? on what planet do you live on that you NEED to watch a movie? And you would pay for it as long as it wasnt more expensive then whatever number you think is too much.

1penny for this crappy movie, F-that big corp, I need to pirate to show them.

 

[opfreak]

Oh. You only want to discuss the theft of music. Not why it's done. Got it.

we are discussing piracy, and your going off on drug prices.

 

[illram]

I get all my content legally but I don't give a shit if others don't. What does annoy me are the fake excuses some people make, when really they just want their shit for free.

 

[Pieter3dnow]

Anyone can tell you that piracy is pretty rampant—but just how many people are illegally downloading and streaming content? We may now have a decent idea of that, as a YouGov survey has revealed a third of all U.S. adults do so. But considering that poll was spearheaded by an anti-piracy firm, I can only wonder if it has been skewed in any way…

Through YouGov, the company conducted a representative survey of over 1,000 respondents which found that 32 percent of all US adults admit to streaming or downloading pirated video content. These self-confessed pirates are interested in a wide variety of video content. TV-shows and movies that still play in theaters are on the top of the list for many, with 24 percent each, but older movies, live sports and Netflix originals are mentioned as well. The data further show that the majority of US adults (69%) know that piracy is illegal. Interestingly, this also means that a large chunk of the population believes that they’re doing nothing wrong.

I could start a (crowd fund) survey on how these polls were all getting to know and love are totally useless. I'm sure I can get the result "I" would have paid for .

 

[lcpiper]

How so? What barriers have been removed/lowered? Movies still cost a ton. TV now costs to watch it and we still get the commercials, even more of them, as the providers work very hard to make cutting the cord ever more difficult, while going back on their marketing promises in the fine print/fast talk. They rig the system constantly (triple play? Sure. Landline $30, internet $30, TV $30. Oh, you don't want the Landline or TV? Ok, that'll be $85 for the internet.).As far as music, for 45 years it was, want a great song? Sure, just buy these other 13 pieces of crap and you can have it. Now today, we don't even have 'album cuts'.....mostly because most of the songs suck anyway. Great; now that they've finally started selling music at a decent price again, there's not much worth buying. Besides, whenever they do get around to making something I DO want to buy, I'll (and mulitmillions of others, too) will just take that song, and give them back one of their crap songs (delete it from my library). If they think that song is worth the money, good, THEY can buy it back.


While I'm sure you could look at it that way, remember that it's most often a response to being intentionally ripped off by someone who['s charging you way more than an item is worth simply because they can. How would you feel if one company purchased all the bakeries as well as monopolizing all sources of flour, and started charging $50 for a loaf of bread? (things like that have been done, back in the old west during the gold rushes). While you could say that they could simply do without the song/movie/bread/whatever, our country's creation was a response to getting ripped off by the British (not just taxes, but heavy handed regulation keeping all the land in name of the king). So there's a precedent of sorts for not putting up with it.

There will always be some who steal. But most are willing to pay a fair price for a decent product. When we get ripped off, however, that changes the game.

Movies still cost a ton?

Back in the early 90's, in the big days of VHS and BlockBuster video stores and others. I am pretty sure Hastings at that time was big too. I think it was Hastings that I went into and asked them how much it would cost for me to buy a "master" copy of a movie. Back then Movies were not yet being sold retail, you could only rent them and I wanted to buy one. I was quoted a price that was over $300 USD to buy a Master copy of a movie which is what the rental outfits used to make their copies from for rentals.

Anyone else remember something like this ?

I remember Deadwood selling for about $150 a season. I bought them when a store was shutting down at 60% retail so about $85 each season. I think movies have dropped quite a bit. And if you hit the bargain bins you'll get decent BluRays for $6.99 or so at Best Buy and Walmart.

 

[SilverSliver]

There is ZERO reason not to have bluray quality mkv type formats you can purchase directly from a publisher. It should NOT be at a premium compared to buying the bluray at a store. Fumbling through a hard media collection and having a blu-ray player at each TV is absolutely fucking archaic. No reason I can't buy it and have it automatically loaded onto Plex and stream it onto any device I please, whenever I want.

 

[lcpiper]

There is ZERO reason not to have bluray quality mkv type formats you can purchase directly from a publisher. It should NOT be at a premium compared to buying the bluray at a store. Fumbling through a hard media collection and having a blu-ray player at each TV is absolutely fucking archaic. No reason I can't buy it and have it automatically loaded onto Plex and stream it onto any device I please, whenever I want.

Ummm, My wife streams everything she watches on her 32" Sony, through her Apple TVs, with her IPad over wireless.

I stream most of what I watch over the computer and watch on my monitor.

Sometimes I watch Blu-Rays on the only TV in the house that has a Blu-Ray player attached, the 50" Panasonic Plasma in the living room. I have been tempted to replace that TV with a 4K and frankly, as little use as it gets I don't think I will. I will probably buy a 40" 4K Samsung as a companion display to my Acer X34 so that I can have two great options depending on the content available.

 

[Shotglass01]

Do you watch said content without paying for it?

Whats forcing you to watch?

Wouldn't say 'forced' to watch. Can watch because paid for with other peoples money.

 

[Rysen]

how has someone making a movie stolen anything from you? on what planet do you live on that you NEED to watch a movie? And you would pay for it as long as it wasnt more expensive then whatever number you think is too much.

1penny for this crappy movie, F-that big corp, I need to pirate to show them.

Did you even read my stuff? I have already told you. If you don't want to read my stuff don't comment about it. Comcast the company that funds the movies and gets affected by piracy steals from you by creating a monopoly that owns the national and local cable that is owned and sold to them by the goverment (and in case you didn't know the goverment's propery is public property) which they paid governors campaigns in order to get them into their political positions and screw me over by allowing comcast to continue its monopoly. Don't bullshit me by telling me that sales affect an individual person making a movie. If you believe that bullshit I have nothing to speak to you about. More than 50% of movies profit goes to capital investments by owners of the corporation and corporate interest.You must also believe that Comcast is your friend and doing everything in the best interest of the people and not revenue. You know what would make a movie editor, actress, or camera crew get better paid? If comcast didn't have a monopoly over the market and they had a truly competitive market. All those people would get paid better.

It is not a need, you don't get it. It's a right. Cable is public property that we lend through the goverment to fucking corporations. If companies are taking advantage of this system by buying off politicians then yes I have a right to watch content that should be rightfully distributed because I need access to information and entertainment like every other human in the world. Who said that people don't have a need for entertainment? And who told you that people have to opt out of a certain type of entertainment simply because they don't agree with the companies shady business? Do you not get what not having another option means? We can chose to live without cars if we don't like the automotive's industry shady business but we don't because we choose to use cars to go to the place we want for recreation over public transportation, because the other option has been made useless compare to the large investment in highways and the automotive industry that our local goverment has allowed. Same with entertainment, companies like Comcast have ensured that alternatives such as watching independent content is non existent. This is not all a big fucking coincidence.


It's not a number I think is too much. There is no competitive market. There are no reference points for price comparison, they eliminated all of them by removing all possible competitors. This is literally the opposite of the definition of fucking capitalism, not a closed market but a free market where everyone can compete, and you don't use goverment to benefit you. How hard is to get this stuff? Jesus. Did you even go to college? It's basic History, economics, philosophy. For years corporations have been using public property for their own benefit. People In my state also paid for a stadium that is sponsored by Comcast that I didn't agree it should be built with public money. Guess what politicians did not agree with my opinion, specially when organizations with ties to Comcast paid large sums of money to the governors political campaign.