Love this place (and Lidl) ****ing insanity, this will end up as a how to guide for getting around Copyright trolls and Tesco. 
Off Topic SKY WILL HAND OVER CUSTOMER DATA IN MOVIE PIRACY CASE
- Thread starter luvgonzo
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
You can't expect us to stay on topic for 5 pages.Love this place (and Lidl) ****ing insanity, this will end up as a how to guide for getting around Copyright trolls and Tesco.
Did you look at the link in #93?
Love this place (and Lidl) ****ing insanity, this will end up as a how to guide for getting around Copyright trolls and Tesco.
I used to swap the reduced priced sandwich stickers at Tescos
I also used to pinch pornos and sell them at school + college
I think It isnt what you steal, but who you steal it off
Not that this inforrmation is helpful
There, Ive confessed,
Take me to Church
Thanks, I had missed that will look at that and what Swarbs posted tomorrow.
S
Super G Ted'inho
Guest
My comments say the greedy ****ers brought it on themselves. Never said it was ok to steal films, music, footage, etc. I just don't care too much either
PS... I also said I've started paying for some aspects too
I agree with Gerrez, the greed of these people has pushed pirate sites to become so popular. Is it ok to pop down the local shop and nick something? No it's not, but is it ok to download a film because you cannot afford to rent them or buy them? Well no it's not I suppose.
The question is why as a society do we feel the need to go and download this film? And why do we differnciate in this way?
Does anyone have any idea how much music fills an Ipod?
If you miss an episode of Corrie (theme here) is it really that bad to download it, or am I being simply idiotic and simplifying the situation?
Shouldn't these idiots learn to deal with the general public and how to work with us (Netflix) other than keeping their products out of reach?
Are we ripping the artist off? No, they live in big houses and drive expensive cars, it's the movie and music industry, the big money men who are out there trying to get even more money from ordinary people.
The accusations of stealing are correct but the morals of it all have changed in a digital age. Think again before pointing the finger, you maybe looking at the wrong person.
The question is why as a society do we feel the need to go and download this film? And why do we differnciate in this way?
Does anyone have any idea how much music fills an Ipod?
If you miss an episode of Corrie (theme here) is it really that bad to download it, or am I being simply idiotic and simplifying the situation?
Shouldn't these idiots learn to deal with the general public and how to work with us (Netflix) other than keeping their products out of reach?
Are we ripping the artist off? No, they live in big houses and drive expensive cars, it's the movie and music industry, the big money men who are out there trying to get even more money from ordinary people.
The accusations of stealing are correct but the morals of it all have changed in a digital age. Think again before pointing the finger, you maybe looking at the wrong person.
S
Super G Ted'inho
Guest
On the Corrie point, most of what I download is TV programmes anyway. Arrow, The Flash, TWS, Lost, Better Call Saul, etc. All programmes that people could of, can or will eventually be able to watch on regular TV.
As for stealing from a shop, I'm sure people would have a different view on that if the shops decided to start changing £10 for bread or milk etc!
On the first point, it's supply and demand same as any other form of retail. They'll charge a price that people will pay, and they'll keep pushing that envelope until the price point starts having a negative effect on volume.
Not having your justification of ripping off artists tbh, "they live in big houses" so it's therefore 'Ok' is not a valid argument nor a morally acceptable standpoint imo. Theft is theft, all that's changed in the digital age is that you can lift products 'virtually' and some people have adjusted their moral compass to somehow justify this. You wouldn't have walked into HMV and lifted a DVD 15 years ago, but you're attemtping to justify doing the same thing but on a virtual platform.
People have formed these views imo because it's viewed as a faceless and victimless crime, it's also been done with people thinking they're anonymous.
S
Super G Ted'inho
Guest
This is the greed that we as a society have come to accept, what happened to a fair price for a product? These people want to make money of course but the desire to become very rich then drives people to look at alternative and illegal means of getting that product. Is it right for people to do that? No but I don't look at people who download a film in the same way as someone who robs a bank because once again greed is the driving factor.
Adjusting that moral compass as you say is exactly what people are doing and this adjustment is down to the capitalist society that we now live in where you can work your bollox off and still struggle financially while the rich are sitting pretty making money while sitting on their collective arse.
It's a bit of a grey area, in that TV companies still make strenuous efforts to hold their copyright, yet anyone can record and save a TV show when it's broadcast.
I think the issue (for the producers) has more to do with a third party profiting from copyrighted material, rather than the simple fact of someone watching it. I wouldn't download a new film illegally when all I have to do is wait for it to become readily available, legally. The point is, that the law firms pursuing these cases have no interest in "justice"- they are simply using the law for profit, and that in itself is morally dubious- like private companies making huge profits from clamping illegally parked cars.
Like with the stealing bread scenario, theft is morally wrong, but so is profiteering. However one is clearly illegal, and the other open to interpretation.
I think the issue (for the producers) has more to do with a third party profiting from copyrighted material, rather than the simple fact of someone watching it. I wouldn't download a new film illegally when all I have to do is wait for it to become readily available, legally. The point is, that the law firms pursuing these cases have no interest in "justice"- they are simply using the law for profit, and that in itself is morally dubious- like private companies making huge profits from clamping illegally parked cars.
Like with the stealing bread scenario, theft is morally wrong, but so is profiteering. However one is clearly illegal, and the other open to interpretation.
The market defines what is 'fair' though. If G's example of a loaf of bread suddenly became £10 each, would we still buy them? No, we'd go back to baking our own. You can't use affordablity to justify theft, sorry. What we're discussing here isn't a necessary life sustaining staple ffs, it's entertainment.
The attitude that it's OK to take it because it's too expensive, is part of the entitlement culture that we've developed in this country in recent years. "I can't afford it, but I should have it, because otherwise it'd be unfair" is a bollocks argument. I'd like an Aston Martin, but I can't afford one. Aston make a hefty profit out of each one sold, and if they were half the price they'd probably still make a profit and I maybe could afford to buy one.....boo hoo, it's not fair. OK and an extreme example but exactly the same basic principle.
I have 7,039 songs on my iPod, which takes up 39.9 GB. The exact answer obviously depends on the quality of the audio file, the length of the song, the capacity of the iPod etc.
How out of reach are they though, really?
A small amount of them, yes. Most, no.
Why? What's changed? The only thing that's changed is that certain people have decided that data files should be free, simply because it's easier to trade them without being caught. If you think it's ok (not saying you do) to freely download copyrighted films and music, then you're effectively also saying it's ok to go into HMV (or an independent shop, good luck finding one) and take the DVDs and CDs for free. Yet most people would hesitate from doing that.
I understand the theft part of all this and the standpoint of those simply against downloading anything. The simplest way of explaining my point is that pirate sites hurt the rich corporations and push them to lower costs so I support that standpoint.
There are Ipods with capacity to have 127000 of songs, why? Because Apple know people download music and by providing that product are supporting that industry. Nothing to do with the argument really just pointing out that some companies are actually supporting piracy, there was support from Game of Thrones recently where they suggested that word of mouth and downloading had driven the programme.
S
Super G Ted'inho
Guest
I have to say on a point against piracy that the standpoint of fighting against the man has become warped and there are people now who just do it because they can.
I think that best way to sum this discussion up is "****'em"
Indeed.
Way I see it, I wouldnt have watched half the **** I have were it not for downloads
so they have lost nothing, I wouldnt have gone and bought "film X" on DVD if I couldnt have got it online anyway, so they dont lose a thing, i just wouldnt have watched it
In fact there have been a few cases where I have downloaded a movie or TV show and liked it so much I have actually gone and bought the DVD, or series boxset
for the collectors edition and Extras etc, which I wouldnt have done had I not initially downloaded it.
I can follow that to an extent, though it assumes that there's no effective competition between the companies to force them to lower prices. My problem is that it's not just the big corporations that suffer, but also the smaller people involved (probably more for music than films to be fair, although the big films are supposed to make the money to support several loss-making films).
Indeed, and there are also musicians who also support people spreading their music in order to get them known and allow them to make money in other ways (e.g. touring, merchandise). In which case, there's obviously no (or less, depending on the circumstances) of a problem, although they may just be providing the music for free rather than actual piracy.
Similar threads
