Slashdot Mirror
MPAA to Launch Anti-Piracy Commercials
cfish writes "The MPAA is launching expensive 30 second TV commercials to preach about movie piracy. Featuring starving artists in the movie industry."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
But wait, I saw Pirates of the Caribbean yesterday and the moral at the end was something like, "Sometimes you need a little piracy in order to do the right thing."
But the MPAA says it's bad. Why must Hollywood send me conflicting messages?
Mike
I wonder if they will count the costs of the commercials in the money they are loosing every year to piracy...
1 From the Article: Stressing the importance of copyright protection, the campaign begins with an unprecedented television "roadblock" on more than 35 network and cable outlets on the evening of July 24, with each network donating 30 seconds in the first prime time break.
:)
Beginning Friday, July 25, every major exhibitor in the country will donate time to play daily trailers on all screens in more than 5,000 theaters across the United States.
Sounds like a pretty huge campaign, gonna dwarf the EFF's efforts by a big margin.
2 Here is the website of the campaign. There's even some FUD: Network users have a back door to your hard drive while you're online, thereby seeing your personal, private information, such as bank records, social security number, etc.
3 The article first said (in the badly edited future) it was the RIAA doing it, when it's the MPAA...I think it was a case of RIAA on the brain.
Just don't pirate movies from the starving artists -- Stick to pirating movies from the filthy rich ones.
--
...the terrorists have already won!
the war on piracy....it'll have the same results as the war on drugs, or the war on terrorism...
!(^((ri)|(mp))aa$)
Is somebody going to make commercials about video/DVD hardware vendors that can't make new products sell as well since they have the extra expense of DRM?
You no the ironic thing about all this? You just KNOW someone will copy these commercials and throw them up on Kazaa and such.
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
please feed a starving pirate today..
send food to India, China, Asia, and anywhere else but US..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
Since I've got TiVo, I ignore commercials, so can someone copy that to the web in some viewable format?
My other sig is extremely clever...
Now that is interesting. It must be nice to get free time on the major networks for a lobbying effort. JAV
Oh wait...
The EFF has just begun a pro file-sharing. It is an awareness campaign which effectively cuts the RIAA out of the loop, called "Let The Music Play". Details here.
std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
you can save poor Arnies estate in Malibu..
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
It is the intellectual property laws that are truly unnatural and immoral. I remain one of the very few who propose this on slashdot.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
... so I can skip those pesky commercials and have a copy of my TV program.
..not to put them in previews at the beginning of theatre movies. I doubt you would find them in a pirates "telecine" version.
Because somebody didn't pay to see the movie or because the movies they were in sucked or because the studio refused to give them their paycheck (*cough*Stan Lee*cough*)?
Ben
Work Safe Porn
I'm sure the artists are starving because people pirate movies and not becuase only the big actors and execs make money while everyone else barely scrapes by.
Let's hope the ads focus on those film stars most affected by video piracy: Jenna Jameson, Devon, Asia Carerra, etc.
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
They never have. You never were worried about breaking the law when you copied cassette tapes or video tapes for your friends back in the 80s/90s, were you? Or if you recorded a TV show onto your VCR and then shared it with a coworker or neighbor?
How long can the MPAA and the RIAA go against what the people beleive? Can they wage a war to change our minds and convince people that sharing music IS piracy? Or will they just give up and find new ways to screw us over ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H generate profits?
--jdan
Featuring starving artists in the movie industry
Lemme see. Who are they going to run in the ads? Metallica? What I would like to see is some of the artists that were truly screwed by the RIAA and the labels represented here. People like Jen Trynin who is amazingly talented, but had a baaaad experience with the labels.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
The editors are being a bit glib with their precis. The adverts actually feature people a bit lower in the food chain (make-up artists etc) than those earning millions per film. Presumably the message is that people like that will be cut before the studio dares to review Arnie's salary. Whether this is true or not, I don't know, but as I don't have broadband I'm a disinterested party in all this.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
Hell, I want to see a commercial that shows starving Americans that were the result of the greedy corporations moving their jobs overseas.
How about that to "enlighten" people?
There's a bunch of free movies out there! All you need is a computer and an internet connection!
Now everyone will know that it's easy to get them.
Think like a man of action, act like a man of thought.
Idiocy likes this makes me thankful that I am boycotting television. Why subject yourself to mindless drek filled with awful advertising when you can have the Internet? The Internet is much better.
I even found a service called KaZaA Gold. It's like the KaZaA you leeches use, but it's legit. For just $1.50 a month, I can download all the content I want -- including Hollywood films.
Why can't Hollywood embrace the Internet, instead of trying to shut it down?
We should launch an add telling people that the shouldent buy crap from them. See how long they last with no income.. when was the last time you saw a famous Musician or a record label exec in a soup kitchen other than trying to get PR? I say we tell everyone we know NOT to buy a single CD or movie the entire month of December, the month that will jab the blood sucking leaches right when it hurts!
I wonder how many unlicensed copies of software are running around the MPAA offices, movie studios, and the homes of those poor folks being impacted by movie piracy.
Can You Say Linux? I Knew That You Could.
It's not as appropriate but still funny.
s/Kid Rock/movie star of your choice.
Kid Rock Starves to Death
49 20 68 61 76 65 20 74 6F 6F 20 6D 75 63 68 20 66 72 65 65 20 74 69 6D 65 2E
I'm not saying piracy is good, but all I know is, artists get screwed over by pretty much everyone. Supporting the MPAA won't mean that all those poor starving artists will suddenly live like rajahs. It'll be the CEOs etc. etc that get to live the good life.
Their pitch: downloading music illegally will make you fat, your skin pale and spotty, and your social and love life wither on the vine...
Fuck! It's true!
Reliable, Great Value Hosting: $7.95/mo 2.4G/120G
So has the motto of the "public service" announcements gone from The more you know to The more you rip?
My local library has hundreds of movies on DVD, and thousands on VHS, that they allow anybody to view for free... does this mean that sweet little old lady at the checkout desk is a PIRATE???
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
- Just not getting it
- Delusional
- Playing games (i.e. laying foundations for more legislation)
I agree that piracy is a crime and folks who are engaging in it are making it harder for the rest of us, but honestly does the RIAA/MPAA expect that the people engaged in this are going to reform by looking at 30 second commercials?All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be
Not another thing to sit through before I get to watch the damn movie.
No matter, really... movies nowadays are 2 hour ads, anyway.
Anybody see the BMW Mini movie (Italian Job) or the latest Nokia flick (Charlie's Angels)?
Well, I guess if you're going to lose money in ticket sales to piracy, you need another way to make money... just sell your artistic integrity to the highest bidder.
-n-
wonder if these commercials will spread on the usual p2p networks?
ofcoz cuz overseas and the international pirates also want to be educated.
no discrimination against the international piracy community.
please record and spread that shit to some torrent and p2p networks and post the links.
i bet the intl community also wants to have a good laaaf.
thank you
Yeah right, I'll bet they are getting buddy buddy with the TV networks and telling them things like "Either you're on our side, or you'll stop showing our movies." Perhaps I'm wrong. Actually, I hope that I am.
We must start a charity with the UN to help Feed the poor starving MPAA. The United Nations Movie Organization For Underpaid Corporate Kiddies (UNMOFUCK) will help supply free Porsche and BMW to these unfortunate victims of LINUX. Please save the starving super models.
Science is the Real TRUTH!
A new Hollywood blockbuster starring Kevin Costner, about a lone movie pirate and his merry #movies men, who rip movies from the rich to drive click-through web site traffic to support the poor.
:-) I rock! And I've been selling hard drives chock full of them for $500 a pop!
The drama of out of work actors.
Shame
The Jaguar and Ferrari repossessed
Ignominy
The Beverly Hills mansion foreclosed upon
Turned away from the country club...
The horror!!!
The story could tell how their idyllic lives were shattered by piracy. How large corporate executives and A-list actors are thrown onto the street overnight.
Featuring starving artists in the movie industry
/. articles I've seen regarding piracy, most of this "starving artist" act has been nothing but lip service. Where's the movement to get these artists more money? Where's the protest?
Whatever! Like all the little thieves REALLY care about the artists. They just want to justify their immoral activities with any excuse. At least if you're gonna rip people off, be honest about it. Hiding under this pretencious veil is so hypocritical.
In all the previous
And mind telling me EXACTLY how ripping off their work does these "starving" artists any good?
eTrade SUCKS
If anyone lives in Canada and has Shaw as a cable provider, you've probably seen those ridiculously absurd ads for the "coalition against stealing satellite signals" or whatever.
That one with the kid stealing a chocolate bar, then the police showing up at the house with the kid, and the dad asking where he learned to steal... certainly not from him. "But dad, you steal satellite signals!"
You really have to see it to believe it. Wonder if these will be along the same idiotic lines.
All we need now is a sweeping anti-piracy bill that will make everyone from P2P downloaders to video time-shifters felons...oh wait! This nutso stuff from the RIAA/MPAA has got to stop somewhere...
I only hope that these commercials have the same dramatic impact that the "Dont copy that floppy" Anti-Software Piracy Campaign had ;-)
Don't forget this one. It applies to downloading movies also.
Don't they all get payed by some contract or even if they are back stage people they would get payed hourly. How much of the millions of dollars a movie makes really goes to these people?
I don't think they are the victims of movie piracy. They will get their paycheck just by showing up at the door. The theaters will lose some people (maybe)... but if they come out with a good show I would go to the theater to watch it.
The victims are the companies like paramount disney sony who make millions of dollars on one movie. I know Spider Man made Sony more money than many of their electronic devices did last year.
Can you ping me now?... Good!
Wow! I never knew I could get all the latest Hollywood movies over the computer until I saw this ad at the theater the other day. I'm never paying $10 to see a movie again! What a ripoff!
Pan out the windows of his dorm room
Show a copy of his bank account with $32 in it
Show you being a heartless bastard and him opening a subpoena
Show him getting really pissed off just because you think the world owes you because you managed to rip off some recording artist.
Show that, and I'll be impressed.
Fuck the RIAA
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
"Hi, this is Metallica. Over the past several years we've made 300 Million dollars. Recently due to Music Piracy by Napster, Kazza, Morpheous, Windows Networking, Computers, and the Internet, we've only been able to make a measly 100 Million this year.
With your help we can again start making our usual 300 Million and continue to ROCK ON FOR YOU! So please. Don't steal digital music it's morally, ethically, and legally wrong."
(star shoots across the screen) do dooo doo - The more you know
Ave Molech Setting
I can't wait to grab that off Kazaa and share with my friends!!
So has anyone found the divx of this off Kazaa yet?
How long before these commercials show up on Morpheus/KaZaA/whatever? Either the commercials themselves will be pirated, or (delightfully devilish, Seymour) the studios themselves will be seeding these out there under movie titles!
Either way, ranks right up there with the annoying PSA blitz against drunk driving. Not that I don't agree, but beating it into my skull isn't the way to go.
49 20 68 61 76 65 20 74 6F 6F 20 6D 75 63 68 20 66 72 65 65 20 74 69 6D 65 2E
Two kids are sitting at a computer. They are both listening to the CD. One says to the other, "Hey, that's a real cool CD." The other says, "Say, if you have a blank CD-R, I can burn you a copy." They put the CD-R into the machine. Suddenly...
...uh, I mean CD!" ...
.wma video of it at http://static.hugi.is/video/fyndin/dctf-1.wmv (dial-up user warning: it's a 15MB download).
Some black rapper reject from the PJ's jumps out onto the desktop screen and starts to rap. "Don't copy...don't copy that floppy!
For anyone who doesn't get the joke, there was a video released back in 1992 by (I think) the SIAA titled "Don't copy that floppy." It is the funniest 8 minute public service announcement video you will ever seen in your life. A rapper does this rap chanting "Don't copy...don't copy that floppy" after two kids try and use a Mac to copy a "cool game" onto another floppy disk. You just have to see it to believe it. You can watch a
I for one think this is a step in the right direction...
(wait wait, put down those torches and pitchforks while I explain!)
Now they're bringing their issues to the mainstream public. I think what they'll find is that they are going to alienate the general public, and causing the public to think twice about what they buy and who they support by buying it.
--Chag
None of these people (set painters, stunt people etc etc) get residuals - they get paid a union wage - they don't get part of the DVD/VHS post big-screen revenue stream that could be damaged by file swapping - they ought to have some fat-cat studio moguls, some big producers, and some million dollar stars out there shilling for them "we'll only take home $5M next year if you swap movies" ....
If I PAID to see a movie why the hell would I need to be told not to pirate it? I paid for it!
I never spellcheck and I freely admit it. Save your karma for more worthwhile "lol erorrs" replies
Starving artists in the movie industry? You mean, like the ones who made 405, or Batman: Dead End? They're happy they were able to get their content on the net, where it would be appreciated and would demonstrate their talent.
Also, if you want the MPAA's message stright from the source, it's at http://www.respectcopyrights.org.
This coming ad campaing only makes the MPAA/RIAA establishment seem even spookier. Sure, they seem like a bunch of greedy execs (ok, they are a bunch of greedy execs). And sure, it's the business establishment that picks the pockets of artists more than even the most prolific digital pirate. But the movement that these guys have made lately is really spooky.
Just recently, there have been civil suits agains poor college students and threats against oodles of end users. The spookiness is increasing as, god forgive them, the courts are siding with them.
The worst-case future that I'm starting to smell here resembles some of the futuristic cyber punk fiction, where massive corporations outstrip even the government in power, resources, and lust for more of both.
/paranoid rant
"...Featuring starving artists in the movie industry."
I was wondering why all those girls on MTV are so thin.
This is the AVI that Dan downloaded.
This is the sharer who hosted the AVI that Dan downloaded.
This is the cracker who sold ripped the AVI that the sharer hosted that Dan downloaded.
And this is movie star who shot herself for losing the money.
Downloading AVIs supports terrible things. If you download AVIs you might too.
Brought to you by the MPAA
We need to get together and mak 30 second comercials showing the starving artists and then show the executives at the record labels eating out at five star restaurants every night then ask the public to decide who is "starving" the artists. P.S. The exectives should be having diner with their lawyers and discussing how they can reword the contracts to make sure that the artists don't get anymore of their "five star restaurant dinner" money.
It is rumoured that they hired the same advertising agency who designed this campaign.
...by actually hiring a few writers to come up with these things they used to call 'plots' for movies. There used to also be a species of 'artist' native to Hollywood that they called 'consistency' people - they would make sure the scenes in the movie weren't in jarring discordance. They also had people called 'consultants' that would make sure technical aspects of the movie weren't so bad as to ruin the suspension of disbelief. Oh, and they managed to avoid having fat and rich producer/director/writers take the most powerful warriors the universe has known and having them forget about their powers when strapped to a rock (but I digress).
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I've never really thought of the MPAA as 'evil'... not like the RIAA. So far we haven't heard much FUD from them, and the RIAA seems to be the one spearheading all the lawsuits and anti-piracy campaigns. At least they're trying to influece the public through a commercial rather than a courtroom.
Moreover, the value of movies seem to be much higher than any CDs. After all, for close to the same price as a regularly priced 45min CD you get hours of *visual* content on a DVD or VHS. I see second run movies at the dollar theatre all the time. Almost all the money I used to spend on CDs has been going to DVDs. They just seem worth it compared to what you get on a CD. It's hard to lay blame on the MPAA for wanting to crack down on piracy.
The sending of this message pretty much inconveniences everyone involved.
"on all screens in more than 5,000 theaters across the United States"
Move on! These suckers have already given up their five bucks, call them crooks and they won't come back no more.
While college students and geeks have been downloading and ripping movies for years, at least on a limited basis, I don't think the general public has much awareness about movie piracy/sharing (certainly not when compared to music)... ...until now.
Sure there's usually stories about how the latest crappy sequel of the week is available on the net or in China before opening night, but I can't wait to see if movie downloading jumps significantly after this campaign.
I think this will be a case of "any publicity being good publicity" (where good = effective = bad from the MPAA perspective). Maybe they should just save their time and trade their millions in advertising right for a 25 cent call to Steve Jobs right now.
My next sig will be ready soon, but friends can beat the rush!
So does this mean that the MPAA are gonna start sending out subpoenas too?
They have obviously failed to apply some simple logic.
Nobody is pirating movies made by 'starving artists.' If it was worth buying, then it would be worth pirating. If it was worth buying, then they wouldn't be 'starving.'
The other point of view, though, is that these 'starving artists' are probably 'starving' because they buy more heroin than food.
I wonder if piracy would become less of an issue if it were more affordable to see a movie in the theaters. The theater is hands down a better movie watching experience than a computer monitor. However, tickets to most theaters are at least $8.00 a seat. Your four person family is spending at least $32.00 for 1 1/2 - 2 hours of entertainment, not counting the pound of flesh they lose if they visit the snack counter.
I remember going to the theater quite often 10 years or so ago as a child. I don't remember it being so expensive then, but I also wasn't paying for it.
The movie industry makes far more money off rentals from me, as that is what is affordable. Three bucks can let me and as many friends watch a flick, along with the all the free snacks that a person can find stashed away in a cupboard.
-- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
Is this MPAA effort a how-to?
Computer Science is Applied Philosophy
She has written a few articles on her
expierence with the record companies.
The quick clumsy summary is that they exploit the artists badly.
She writes these days and plays in the band Loveless. I have seen them play a few times and they are great. Fun well written Pop/Rock. (I don't know exactly how to describe them)
lvls.com has a free MP3 to download with the bands permission so people can check them out.
A very different attitude towards file sharing!
--->Life is like that sometimes...
I just want to know how soon leaked copies of these comercial gems will be available for download.
is that bad? lol
Do they mean the extras who get paid the absolute minimum the studio can get away with and who will beg, borrow and steal to get actual union work that will allow them to enter the actor's union? Well I suppose if they do at least that means some of them might get their tickets and get union membership (having a speaking part constituites union work) and upgrade themselves to "poor but fed artists". So at least someone will benefit from this... as well as the studios and movie stars who actually get a share of the box office sales etc.
It would be very annoying to see these commercials offered on TIVO.
If the commercials aren't offered on the TIVO by TIVO, why again would I watch a commercial?
"Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
I wonder if the commercials are gonna be anything like the anti-drug campaign. "Buying pot funds terrorism." blah blah
I can see it now. "When you steal the Hulk you're helping the terrorists!!! So unless you want the FBI interrogating your ass, stop pirating!"
From the article: ..invoke the message: "Movies. They're Worth It."
That has to be the funniest thing I've heard in a long time.
- A non-productive mind is with absolutely zero balance.
- AC
For those interested, you can view the commercials online. This was linked from a BBC article earlier this morning.
the production and hiring of everybody involved to make the thing will most certainly not be free.
I think its hilarious that they want to use morality to try and persuade people to not pirate their movies. For years the entertainment industry has come out with morality killing movies, tv programs and music, now the monsters they have created couldn't care less about morality of it. I think its nice for them to have to eat it.
Why don't they feature the starving artists of the hacking/cracking/cryptography reverse engineering tech industry? They are starving artist too ya know!
Nobody is telling them that they can't attempt to make a living through acting, singing or dancing. Make your living any way you can. But if your business model fails don't cry foul.
When you mass produce art it loses its value. Yet here is an industry that insists upon using any method possible to prop up a broken method of enrichment. So as far as I can see the problem is they don't understand that people don't value their work, and they need to adjust it if it is to be more than simply personal gratification.
Most movies suck. If Hollywood stopped putting out so much crap I'd be more inclined to attend the theater. I pay for all the good movies that come out, and I rent movies. Of course I've downloaded/archived my own movies, but they're usually movies that I've rented/own or movies that aren't worth paying for in the first place.
The first spot had better feature Stan Lee. HE was robbed.
Anyone got a torrent.
In addition, it will show how easy it is to enjoy high-quality entertainment online in ways that both protect American families and the interests of creators.
"The support for this PSA campaign throughout the entertainment industry -- from television networks to theater owners, from well-known actors to employees both in front of and behind the camera -- is truly extraordinary, and a testament to the urgency of this threat
Anybody else catch the tone of the language here? All it needs now is a al jazeera videotape of osama going: "Piracy good! Infidels bad! Aargh mateys!"
But why don't they use the money they are putting into these commercials and help some of these "starving artists" launch a career.
You know, if they are starving maybe its because they suck
Too bad that piracy doesn't really hurt the little guys. Studios need these people to make movies. However, they don't need all the leaches at the top of the system. All they usually do is make phone calls and SHMOOOOOOZE. Piracy hurts the fat cats at the top. Hence the ad campaign.
Aready saw them on Kazza. :P
Funny how all the people mentioned in the article as being featured in the ads are all unionized behind the scenes types, and get paid the same reguardless of how well the movie does.
Sounds like most of the Slashdot crowd has no issue with downloading a copy of a movie instead of either seeing it in the theather, or buying it on DVD when it comes out. However, I would bet that most of the same people wouldn't walk into a store and steal the DVD off of the shelf, or steal much of anything else from a physical store for that matter.
What's the difference to all of you? The fact that what your taking is a bunch of bits and bytes vs something that you can put your hands on? If someone is selling something, digital or physical, and receive a copy without either buying it, or having it given to you as a gift, or by the creator themselves, it's stealing. It might be a simplistic view, but it's a view that most people have.
It's amazing that many slashdotters don't have an issue with downloading copies of movies, but seem to have an issue with other companies using free software and not giving the proper people credit. Must be a sliding moral code...
Cause everyone knows the the biggest export from SE Asia is pirated materials.
If the king of pop says locking up filetraders is crazy, it must be so, because he's batshit-crazy himself!
I'm pleased the MPAA is doing it this way. I really can't say that being forced to watch a few extra advertisements (Okay - I don;t live in the US, so I won't have to do that either) is going to do me a lot of harm, and if they have a case to make against piracy, they're welcome to make it, and try to convince me that downloading movies off the internet (most of which watch at the cinema anyway) is causing them great hardship.
Personally, I think they've got a hard fight on their hands. I pay for plenty of cinema tickets and DVD purchases. They don't actually have to fork out for the movies I "steal" from them, and I make no profit from them, so I reckon they should just find a way to cope with my watching a few movies without paying, but if they have a strong enough argument, I'm willing to listen.
Will the movie industry learn from the music industry's mistakes?
The solution to unlawful movie distribution is for the movie industry to get busy on providing the infrastructure to enable lawful (for-pay) online movie watching. Many users already have the bandwidth to watch DivX encodes in streaming form, and with buffering software, others could gain the ability to prebuffer for an hour or so before enjoying a film. Provide a place for users to pay to see the film of their choice for $2-3, and you can cut out the theaters and DVD distributors out of a lot of showings while netting a nice profit. Make it more convenient than hunting down bittorrent links.
Fight the 'net and try to suppress online film distribution, and you'll only push the technology forward and drive the pirates further underground. Take a good long look at the RIAA, flailing about and trying random things to no effect... don't turn out like your brother.
Schwartzenegger $30 million for T3
Jim Carrey $20+ million a film
Cameron Diaz $20+ million a film
Mid Tier actors make around $10 million a film
Lower Tier actors make around a few hundred thousand up to multiple millions
The at home user might dl a divx copy of a currently released film playing at the theaters only to go see it at the theater and/or buy it when it's released on DVD.
So the user at home spends around $9 to see the movie at the theater and another $20 to buy the DVD and the actors take many, many millions in salary to make the movie. How does this constitute taking money from the movie industry?
Who is actually taking the money (actors/marketing) and who is supporting the industry (user/consumer)? This is a very simple question without factoring in the obscene amount spent on marketing films. We're talking 10's of millions in marketing films.
It is not out fault that most movies these days are over budgeted and spend too much on marketing to turn a profit. This almost reminds me of the dot-com business model where they just spent to spend without having a sound business model in place.
Don't blame the consumer for your shortsidedness and/or lack of envisioning a film's realistic chances of making money.
This is definitely the day of scape-goating at the pc user/consumer's expense. They can get creative with the books anymore so now it's time to blame the consumer and spend money in support of the propoganda. What better way to distratct shareholders and such from realizing it's just bad business decisions and irresponsibility!
Once again I'm still exersizing my right to boycott because I refuse to support an entity that will only try to sue me into financial ruin with the money I give them.
You aren't free to do anything, until you've lost everything.
I would mark that insightful.
illegally downloading movies is a blow to creativity
and hollywood doesn't need any help coming up short on creativity... they've got that covered just fine.
"The connection is very clear. Pirating movies gives money to terrorists."
I hope they take the anti-drug commercial "you're supporting terrorism" approach. Makes for great entertainment, and with the shit coming out of hollywood these days, I could use some great entertainment. Best part is, THEY are PAYING to give us this entertainment for FREE. kickass.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
...if it stars Kevin Costner, then it has to make money, right?
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
>>Featuring starving artists in the movie industry."
Have they considered using potbellied pigs?
Wait, the record company execs didn't want to be in the commercial....
The movie industry had record profits last year.
No, I don't have references, but I read it in a news article maybe a few months ago. Google for it. I bet it's there.
if(!cool) exit(-1);
Says the chariman of the Fox group "We feel very strongly about the need to communicate that [. . .] illegally downloading movies is a blow to creativity"
This fron the people responsible for the term 'foxing' a show. I think Matt Groenig, Joss Whedon, and Ben Edlund, among others, may have a thing or two to say about what exactly constitutes a blow to creativity. Hint: It's not piracy. It's Fox.
I'm so mad I'm going to go off and dwonload a pirated copy of Daredevil and NEVER WATCH IT!
I want the fire back.
Show the greed of the RIAA and how they are
really the ones screwing over the artists and us as well.
Kid Rock starved to death on the cold streets of LA! How many more of our best and brightest must we lose before you dastardly filesharers change your ways?!!
Funniest thing I've read today. :P
Karma: Excellent, but still won't get you laid.
I love "Oh poor me" commercials. This should be even better than the Microsoft ones when they were catching heat from the DoJ.
How many times was "innovation" said again?
-R
Ads for the Satelite broadcasters of America or something like that. Cue the scary music. Guy walks down dark street passes unsuspecting citzens enters his dark room and flicks on *gasp* the TV.
I went to battle MC Escher, but drew a blank
the domain name respectCONSUMERS.org
Well looks like we can all look forward to an even longer wait before the feature film starts while we watch " do not pirate movies" messages on top of all the other commercial crap. This is really getting old.
Put an actor that makes 20+ million per movie up on the screen to lecture how movie piracy hurts everyone.
That ought to win over the majority of the american public, especially the ones that go to matinee films because they are $1 cheaper.
Their PR rep needs some more time off.
Even better, explain to me how this ad campaign is going to stop our friends in Hong Kong from ending thier 20 long streak of movie piracy.
--Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
...declare Chapter 7 Bankruptcy.
Trust me!
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
I completely support the (MP|RI)AA doing everything they can in the court of public opinion to lobby peoples' attitudes about copying. People can talk to me all they want, as long as I can change the channel or choose not to listen - or choose TO listen and consider their views.
Lobbying to pass laws to criminalize behavior is a whole different matter - that's the brute-force approach that leverages the State's monopoly on legal violence to achieve their aims.
Run as many ads and try to change as many minds peacefully and through reason as you want. Appeal to peoples' higher instincts. That's perfect.
Don't make using tools illegal.
-- http://frobnosticate.com
...as a starving Bill Gates in an anti MS piracy ad?
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
Commercial to be followed by a plea from Sally Struthers to 'Feed the Artists'.
Sorry to suggest an unpopular idea, but I think this is a good move on the part of the MPAA. Let's face it, copying a DVD for a friend (of copyrighted material) is illegal. It is, even if you don't want it to be. Nothing wrong with pointing that out, either in a Slashdot post or a movie theater commercial. This is America, land of free speech. They have a message they want to get out, let 'em.
I would much prefer them to put their effort into PR rather than lobbying, anyway.
Since they're showing it on so many channels, I guess it would be a great time to fire up that PVR and skip it. While I'm at it, I might as well store that movie they're showing on HBO tonight.
"Why must Hollywood send me conflicting messages?"
you need to see Amazon Women on the Moon if you want to see really conflicting. Some "pirates" seize the MCA/Universal ship and steal the movies and video discs. It's an absolutely hilarious segment...
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Did anyone stop to think about the fact that all the poor people whose livelihoods depend on the movie industry making money make their money before the movie is even pirateable?... I.e. they get mostly paid up front... it's the long-term residuals they might not get and most of that goes to the cartel. Oooh boo hoo they might decide to make one less crappy movie a year... either way the public benefits.
I get $1.20 off of every CD I sell. With 12 songs on my CD it means every time you pirate a song it cost me 10 cents. For every hundred thousand of your downloads I lose $10,000 !
Of course, my record company gave me an advance of $100,000 that I have to pay back. And then they made me pay for the recording studio where I recorded my own music. That was another $100,000.
Oh wait, They also made me pay for their mid level marketers to pay that money-that-looks-like-but-isn't-really-payola to Clear Channel to get my songs on the radio. That was another $200,000. And of course I have to pay the rest of the band. Not to mention the cost of going out to tour to support this new CD.
Oh yeah, and I don't even own my own songs any more, or my voice, or the recordings of those songs, or the cover art, or anything. In fact, my music is now legally known as "Work for hire". And if I don't like how I'm being treated I can't leave my record label without their permission.
Oh, and the record company that sold those albums? They made about 3 million dollars of profit.
So how am I suppose to pay off my $400,000 debt to the record company if you keep pirating my songs? So stop it. mmm-kay?
Thank you
It makes you think, though... ...which vid format should you download and redistribute?
back in the 80s...it was very effective. take a look:
http://static.hugi.is/video/fyndin/dctf-1.wmv
sorry its wmv, dont got another encode.
Probably because others have come to realize the unreasonable extremism of your stance. I concede that the current state of the copyright and patent systems is absurd and insane, but Ifind nothing wrong with reasonable copyrights and patents. A creator of a work, be it physical or intellectual, should be granted the exclusive rights to reap the rewards of their labor for a reasonable length of time. And while I think inventors should also be allowed a shoirt-term monopoly on their inventions, I do not think that it is reasonable in the least that someone can patent a sequence of genes that they found.
As for trademarks, I have no problem with trademarks at all. If I create a company I want customers to have a reasonable level of assurance that when they by Dogfart brand toothpaste, that they are buying my product and not some cheap knock-off.
The problem is not that intellectuial property is immoral. The problem is that the IP system in place in the USA right now is out of control and has been coopted by the interests of big business at everyone else's expence.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
I can't help but see the irony in the MPAA's anti-piracy campaign website [http://www.respectcopyrights.org/] displaying "Coming Soon" messages for the trailers that have yet to be shown in theatures.
So they want to: 1) Educate people, but only after the cost of admission... will I get any monies refunded for watching what I paid for... a commercial-free showing? 2) Tease the audience with release dates... one of the major reasons movies are pirated in the first place.
'nuff said.
You know they could pay them too. But make billions is much more important
I didn't use the preview button, so get over it!!!!
Mike
If they put these commercials right behind the FBI warning on those VHS tapes and DVDs and didn't let you fast-forward through them, I bet that would deter all those scurvy pirates.
For the amount of movies that have been made that are nothing more then tired rewrite sequels, retread high budget updates to movies from the past, and just flat out lack any effort from the producers/directors/writers I refuse to pay for movies in the theatre anymore. Its one thing if the industry was creating original movies with creative and insightful writing, but anymore its about franchising and draining a genre until death. Rather then spend energy, effort, and money on countering piracy - I wish they'd spead it making original and quality movies.
Well they won't be starving after doing gigs like this for the MPAA.
I prefer my starving artists indie, thank you.
- MPAA to Launch Anti-Piracy Commercials
- Apple: Sell Your Music on iTunes Music Store
and, just a little further down the page I seeMy office has been taken over by iPod people.
There, you expose your idiocy. All ideas are found, nobody can ever create ideas. Since two ideas can be found independently, how can they be created? Moron.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
"All you criminals sitting here just better remember not to pirate the movie you are about to see when you get home!"
Or perhaps, "Don't forget folks, connecting to irc.dal.net, channel #movies, and downloading this feature film for free is against the law! Now enjoy this overpriced content-lacking two hour eyecandy festival while munching on your $9 popcorn and pissing yourself after consuming the 92oz 'Matrix size' Coke we charged you 8 bucks for."
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
"Featuring starving artists in the movie industry." Best laugh ive had all day.
That was funny. And as I was watching it, I was downloading some software. Ironic?
I give it 20 minutes before it's parodied worse than Ellen Feiss.
- Sherman
Okay, I'm going to get flamed for this one. Most people take an extremist viewpoint with respect to file sharing. One one hand, the MPAA and RIAA, along with their political lobby are decrying file sharing in general. On the other hand, the "information wants to be free" camp is decrying copyrights and reproduction regulations of any kind.
I take issue with both. Sure, you may not think it's cool that the MPAA and the RIAA want to make money off of music, movies, etc; And you may even justify this opinion by saying "well, they are exploiting the poor muscisians in the first place" or "they have been found guilty of price gouging", etc. But the fact is, if the MPAA wants to educate people as to the illegality of movie piracy, on the level of principle (and within the laws of this country) they have every reason to do so given their business model in a capitalist economy.
Don't get me wrong...I have nothing against P2P networks, file sharing, etc. Many forward-looking artists are encouraging the free flow of their music through these avenues. The notion of punishing all file-swappers because of the actions of the few, as some legislators have recommended, is assinine.
Balance is what is needed in this argument. The extremist arguments and knee-jerk reactions from the geek community at large will only make the big media companies more worried and more interested in blanket remedies, IMHO. Likewise, the blanket remedies proposed by the big media companies and their lobby will only make the citizens want to lash out all the more.
flame away
It's hard to tell the cool to chill, my favorite hotel room has a view to an ill.
Although I don't support the MPAA's style of attacking P2P and filesharing in general because of piracy, you've got to admit that the MPAA isn't as bad as the RIAA in the prices of media. You can pretty much either:
Spend $20 to buy a DVD of a movie, or
Spend $20 to buy a cd in which you probably will like 2-3 songs.
In that aspect, I don't think the MPAA is doing such a bad job in pricing their products appropriately.
-Neil
starving my ass, I should feel sorry for them because they
can't afford their fith ferrari? or pay for their butler?
the artists are working class joes just like everyone else`
lower the price of media and I would be glad to pay. the saying
you get what you pay for does not apply here currently.
Featuring starving artists in the movie industry
had to reload my browser to check I wasn't reading Fark.com.
I know I'm going to get some slack for this, but here it goes.
I am a strong user of OS software. I love it's quality. I love how it is made. I am a TRUE(tm) believer that knoledge is one of those things that no human can (or should) own.
On the last paragraph of the article, it reads:
"...and that illegally downloading movies is a blow to creativity, not corporate might."
Anyway, my point is, and I guess is not the first time this is asked, how do you feed the creative people? The people that work on the mines of knowledge (which we all want knowledge to be free). If all I did was always just free for everyone to use how do I eat? Do we just create and then hope for the eventual $suport$ that some user decides to send?
I'm pretty much the only guy who likes/uses OS software, because most of the other guys feel that there should be some type of IP. How do you argue agaist it?
The shortest distance between to points is a chord.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
+1, True
Join Tor today!
You're threatening the LIVLIHOOD of thousands
Hahahaha livlihood wtf is livihood
its spellt "LIVELIHOOD" u turds
hahaha
Yes, anti-piracy commercials starring starving actors... with the actors who make $20 Million per flick conveniently hidden behind a curtain.
Total hypocrisy...
Does it make you happy you're so strange?
Where can I download and co er backup these ads?
siggy played guitar
I think the MPAA's advertising campaign is going to backfire on them in a way they didn't realize. Just think about the masses out there that still lack a computer. They'll see these commercials and realize how easy it is to pirate movies and they'll head down to the local Wal-Mart after their welfare check cashes next month and download Kazaa after their 10 year old shows them how to do it (because "Billy" learned how on his school's computer)...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
the movie industry has starving artists? Where are these people, the north pole? like give me a break.
-- DuckWing
Will they try to prosecute me, if I capture the adverts and put them up on Kazaa?
http://jesus.everdense.com/
The only starving actors and actresses are anorexic and that's not because of a lack of money.
Pick a fight, threaten and cheat their friends and behave like a fucking world-class bully?
>with morality killing movies
What does that mean? Because a filmmaker dares to upset the socially conservative status quo by tackling subjects like sex, drugs, violence, bigotry, etc suddenly they have no moral standing?
Sorry but try as you might, you Christian Fundamentalists or whatever you are cannot co-op the word morality and throw it around in the use of a really bad straw man argument.
There's a lot of things to criticize the content industries about, but the content itself should be hands off. Maybe in your world everything should be a Disney fairytale, but don't expect to be taken seriously by those of us in the real world.
this sig is not.
I used to but then I quit.
... most people live in neighborhoods where there's nothing to do but go to the mall or stay home and listen/watch because everything else is either ugly or private property or a parking place and then we'll make sure that even when they're not at the mall there's nothing to do without continually buying something.
It's through the creation of virtual worlds that Hollywood enables the wretched environmental degradation and commercialization of the real one. I'm not saying this is criminal, per se, but only that they should collect their rewards from the pollutersand shopping center/housing tract developers and not from the poor saps who require the narcotics they distribute to live in this degraded/degrading reality of ours, where the best adventure a young person of normal means can hope for is an extended tour of Iraq.
Let's simply have a proportion of corporate tax revenue redirected to support authorized "artists." Either that or close down Hollywood and distribute drugs so we can break the trance and develop our own imaginations again.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
fuck plagiarism
support piracy!!!
When you find gold, and somebody takes it, you don't have it. When you find an idea, and somebody copies you, you still have the idea.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
"Beginning Friday, July 25, every major exhibitor in the country will donate time to play daily trailers on all screens in more than 5,000 theaters across the United States."
Am I reading that right? Are you showing anti-piracy commercials to people who ALREADY PAID TO SEE YOUR MOVIE?
Isn't there already a class-action lawsuit against Loews for showing commercials before movies?
Hey, since we already have your money, lets needlessly lecture you on how bad a person you are. Then you won't enjoy the movie you're about to see because of a poorly constructed viewing environment. COME BACK SOON! ALSO DRINK MORE POWERADE.
awww, you are breaking my heart. maybe if hollywood didn't make so many shitty movies this wouldn't happen.
I can't recall any good movie not making its money back and then some. I wonder why that is.
Thing is, the gaffers/cinematographers/best boys and such that they're featuring are paid salary. They don't get residuals, so they receive the same money whether they sell 1 DVD/ticket or ten million. The only ones who care are execs and really, really big stars, who get a piece of the gross.
In theory, economics says it should all "trickle down" (you steal from the studios, the studios have less money, make fewer movies, hire fewer gaffers, etc.) but that's all kind of abstract and debatable (since I'm not willing to accept their numbers on what piracy costs them). Short term, these guys really don't care if you pirate the DVD or not.
Hollywood is just a huge black hole for our(the consumer) money.It is singlehandedly strangling our humanity and destiny.Its time to move on and put it all to better use.
DMC
is it going to look like this?
http://static.hugi.is/video/fyndin/dctf-1.wmv
You are correct! Your comment is neither interesting nor funny, and has been modded down accordingly! Thank you for playing the "karma loss game"!
Quote from the set painter in the ad:
... because we are not million dollar employees, at all. We are lucky if we can put together 12 straight months..."
"(piracy issue) well I don't believe it affects the producers. I mean it does affect them but it's miniscure to the way it affects me.
So the movie producers admit they are ripping off the workers? The workers get the leftover, which is nothing.
(Nice orange mustache, though. )
.. Most of the movies I now own on DVD I downloaded first. It's always better on DVD. If I download it and like it, I'll buy it. If it sucks, it's not worth my money anyway. Most downloadable movies on Kazaa etc are poor camcorder copies split into 2 low quality Divx files. Who wouldn't buy a GOOD movie on DVD after sampling it via this format first? It just makes me want the DVD to see the movie in it's true, crisp, clear, dolby 5.1 original state. And I'm confident that I'll enjoy the movie because I've seen it's low quality sample for free first.
---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"
With starving artists, they are spending lots of money for the commercials?
Oxymoronic no?
Kinda reminds me of that fat lady who'd talk about the poor starving children.
I think the underlying problem isn't piracy....it's the extortion by those execs.
I dont steal from "starving artists", i only steal big name movies, i pay for the good independent ones. :)
Then cut to an assembly line worker at Sony. "My company paid the DVDCCA license fee, in order to get a piece of the DVD player market. If it weren't for useful legislation like DMCA, you would be able to buy a DVD player from just anybody. That's not fair, and it's un-American."
Then cut to a a guy who sells timebase correctors: "When you pirate, you make it harder for the guys in LA to buy legislation that requires your equipment to implement Macrovision, the technology that keeps your video devices from displaying a bright picture on your TV when they're connected upstream from the VCR. If everyone did that and the laws were no longer funded, then nobody would buy my TBCs anymore. I would be out of a job."
Then cut to a grave headstone that says, "R.I.P. 1937" and a voiceover: "Though I died over sixty five years ago, thanks to the Sonny Bono extension act, my life still has meaning and I have incentive to have written all my stories in the 1920s. When you pirate, you undermine the funding for the laws that makes this possible. Don't let my spirit die in 2018. Don't pirate."
Then cut to Lars Ulrich: "As you probably guesses, The Industry is working on a successor to audio CDs as you know them. These will require proprietary licenses not just to play, but to produce as well. This will help to raise the barrier to music publishing. You don't want just any band to be able to publish music in the same format as the big labels, do you? The record companies help you, by filtering out the bad bands so that you are left with just the cream of the crop, such as my recent 'St. Anger' which all music afficionatos agree is a masterpiece. When you pirate, you undermine the format, thereby undermining this useful selection process."
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Can someone upload these to Kazaa pls ? TIA
The same site has an even better link.
Use it to make them know exactly what you feel about their "campaign".
I suggest that you be very polite, just ask them some questions.
Yes, you are not accusing them of anything, in fact, you'll be happy to support their cause if they just explain certain issues that you find confusing...
Like, for example, wouldn't they agree that taking say, 5-10%, of the $30,000,000 that a single actor might get paid fro a single movie and distributing it among the poor, starving stage workers will help them much more than spending large amounts of money on dishonest advertisements?
Oh, and by the way, when a movie makes some X millions of dollars, how much of it is distributed among the workers and how much is kept by the middlemen (the studios)?
And one last thing, could they you how much the top 50 movies gross in 2002/2003 and what was the average stage worker salary at the time? And would they be so kind as to compare those figures to a time before the wide spread of DVD recorders and high-speed internet (say, 10 years ago?) - adjusted for the usual economy-strength indicators - just to show you what was the effect of piracy on the figures above?
Thank you in advance, best regards, merry christmas, yadda yadda,
Be creative!
Then, if you do get an answer, rip it apart, exposing all its flaws and fallacies (in an extremely polite matter, of course) and ask them for better ones, because it seems to you that they are the real "pirates" in this saga.
If they wouldn't make such shitty movies and gouge people in the ass so hard at the theatre they wouldn't be in such a mess.
I've seen dozens of theatres in this area close up forever over the years.
Last time I went to a movie (about 8 years ago) I took the wife and kids and it was over $30 for 4 tickets and snacks. $3 for a 20oz soda back then when a soda in the store was 49cents.
We just quit going and waited for stuff to come out at the rental store on tape. Now I don't even watch movies anymore, the "actors" all suck.
They can't act and the plot is crap.
That's why they blast you with loud ass music and shit blowing up and SFX from hell. To distract you from the fact that the movie just flat sucks.
I tried to watch LOTR on satellite and I could NOT understand what they were saying, the vocals were too low. When I turned it up to hear what they were saying some loud ass music would blast me even deafer than I am now and I had to turn it back down again. Up and down, up and down.
I finally went and watched it in the bedroom on a 13in TV that has CC and THEN I could at last understand what was going on.
LAY OFF THE LOUD SHIT!!
I have taken to watching movies from the 30's now. They HAD to be good actors, they had no special effects or grand musical score to distract you. They just acted and they had to convince you or the movie was a bomb. It was do or die then. Watch an old movie sometime and see what I mean..
Yes, if they weren't so greedy and would get some real actors and real story writers they might end up doing something good..
The way I see it, with movie piracy, biggest losers here are non-action flicks, comedy, and romance movies.
Personally, I cannot see how one could watch an inferior rip of Matrix Reloaded or T3 on his computer monitor or through Divx on a TV. The quality just isn't there anymore. You're not experiencing the picture and audio they way it was intended. When a studio throws hundreds of millions at some flick which has a decent plot, then $10/ticket is a no-brainer. In case of downloading the movie you are just cheating yourself.
For dialogue based movies which do not feature explosions, sophisticated camerawork, etc it would be fair to say they will suffer more piracy than action-based ones.
Due to this inevitable trend, studios usually have no choice but to upping the action movie production quota just to be more profitable in the box office.
The thing that irks me with the market today is the lack of diversity (below each title it shows how many screens the movie is playing on). Every theatre features the same pictures in proximity of 20 miles from each other. (HEY! Sort of like RIAA's with music distribution). The smaller, more thought out movies are not even on the radar. Take Man on The Train for example. I live in Hollywood, CA and would have to drive 300 miles north (Merced, CA) to watch this movie. That's the closest. But finding a theatre playing Legally Blonde 2 or Bruce Almighty would be easier than finding a Starbucks around here.
Then, we have the international opening dates sometimes several months away from each other. Hey MPAA, get a fucking clue. This isn't the 1920's anymore. When I talk to my friends in Holland, I should automatically assume they have the same roaster of movies playing at their theatres. We are connected globally nowdays. Bumping release dates of movies hurts the cause and encourages piracy.
So in conclusion,
music sharing = death of 1 hit/1 track wonders
movie piracy = death of dialogue based movies.
Just for grins, here's some deep linkage:
Quicktime
WindowsMediaPlayer
Both 300k versions. Share and Enjoy!
This is similar to showing the unskippable FBI warning on frigging DVDs. People who pay are further annoyed, pirates do not notice this at all. Great idea!
would they object to rampant copyright violations with P2P sharing of these commercials??
So, when will these anti-piracy commercials be available on Gnutella?
Did I hear that right, did I hear you saying that you're gonna make a copy of a movie without paying? .avi!
(Although I think they may be using nu-metal this time...)
Come on guys, I thought you knew better, don't copy that
Pirated/DivX
a) No lines
b) Your own food/popcorn/etc
c) Convenience - watch whenever you want
d) Comfort (couch)
e) No noisy idiots in the stands
f) No frickin' commercials
Live
a) Big screen
b) Better sounds (most times)
c) Groupwatch (group-laugh for comedy is often better)
d) "Moral Issues"
e) Employs workers (forget overpaid actors, I mean theatre staff)
Better quality video/sound (no lossy "cam" divX)
You know which really gets me about seeing things live. It's not the $8-10 fee (CAD), it's the fricking commercials. Previews, ok, they show me what other movies I might like. But I do not pay $10 to see a commercial for the newest Mazda/sport-drink/etc. Bad movies are even worse. Take a good plot/theme and massacre it (Hulk movie, specifically the ending)... or hype something up and have it be nothing like the previews (DreamCatcher). Some movies are so bad that I would be upset if I took the time to download them, much less paid to watch them (and I did pay, much to my dissappointment).
I think the best idea would be to put a bunch of "part-movies" on the net. That is, cut the movie off about partway through, somewhat like a long preview. That way, I can see which ones I think would really suck, and the good ones would entice watchers to come see the whole thing... P2P could be a tool that either helps or hurts the movie "industry", it just depends on the use
If they don't even pay the actors.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Show starving artists trying to make their works breath life at all costs... show Jack Valentie et al. living lavish lifestyles at their expense.
meh
movie-loving river ... there's more than enough money to go around in the music and movie industries ... surprised these companies actually fund something like the MPAA! It's sad to think that they are portaying these people as starving artists when, in fact, the movie companies gross so much money from even the worst movie to hit theatres.
Steve: No problem. I will use the pile of money I am lying on right now.
ed2k://|file|antipiracypreview.mpg|52276664|A9C7A5 FDED5193540C1F5F28F660AA5E|/
Someone wanna rip the ad and get it on KaZaa or something for us Aussies?
Mmmmmmm [Homer drool]... starving artists!
This is not the Greatest Post in the World, this is just a tribute
ANOTHER commercial before they show the movies at the theaters...I forget, why do we go to theaters again?
Someone have a copy, please post a bit torrent link. Even poor quality will do!
take your sig and shove it
...that someone would have taken the opportunity to take a jab at the MPAA and point out the error in the big splash graphic: "You're threatening the livlihood (sic) of thousands", but then I realized that it would imply that the typical Slashdot reader would
a. have read the article, and
b. know how to spell
$10 says this will be ripped, redubbed to make them sound like (bigger) tools, and on Kazaa by the next day.
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
Does anyone have a BitTorrent for the commercials yet? I'd settle for Kazaa, I guess, but BT is so much faster...
====
Crudely Drawn Games
... though I guess it's not because of lack of money.
-- shayborg
Beginning Friday, July 25, every major exhibitor in the country will donate time to play daily trailers on all screens in more than 5,000 theaters across the United States.
Well here's a newsflash for you MPAA shitheads: If I'm watching a movie in a theater, I didn't pirate it, did I? Fucking idiots. They're too stupid to live any longer...where's my gun?
You're using her as bait, Master!
This from the people who brought us compelling stories such as "Dude, Where's My Car?", "The Hot Chick", and "The Real Cancune."
The ad would go like this:
"Sept 2005: Selene Dione has shot herself after plummeting sales revenue
Stop piracy before it's too late"
Or perhaps soon we'll have "Just 1 dvd a month can feed a stunt double"
puts ("Python r0cks\n");
From this article :
While copies of popular blockbusters can be found on the Internet, sometimes days before the movie is released to theaters, computer copies of films are still too large to easily download and are often poor quality copies made using hand-held camcorders.
Music files, by contrast, are smaller and are CD quality, making them easy to share.
Laughed out loud when I read it. As a college student, I'd have to say my personal observations indicate otherwise for the college student population.
I already saw them, thanks to an illegal Warez-MP3-DivX site.
However, when others want to plunder their hoard, it's not kosher. So, they buy our politicians and lock us out from doing what they themselves have done to become bazillionaires(steal ideas from others) by extending copyrights past your lifetime (I would consider that as "indefinitely"). And, by convincing the public with propaganda that practicing fair use is immoral if not illegal.
Someone posted an entertaining article regarding copyrights not too long ago:
The Double Edge of Copyright Extensions
= 9J =
Beginning Friday, July 25, every major exhibitor in the country will donate time to play daily trailers on all screens in more than 5,000 theaters across the United States.
Okay, commercials throughout TV shows are acceptable (borderline expected) but, it is wrong that I should have to wait 20-30 minutes of commercials/previews before a movie. As a testament to how sad I am, I time how long the commercials/previews last before every movie I see. And they always average around there. I don't mind the previews most of the time but I'm sick of having to see commercials from The Foundation for a Better Life (none of those (especially when dealing w/ children) will EVER happen). If I see a commercial from the MPAA before a movie, I think I'd have to walk out and demand my money back.
Are you telling me that you don't see the connection between government and laughing at people? - Interviewer
The local cable companies have been running this ad for the past few months:
A young boy goes into a grocery/convenience store, and pockets some candy. He leaves, the shopkeeper catches him, and the next shot is the cops bringing the kid home. So Dad and Junior are having a heart-to-heart, Dad is asking "where did you learn to steal?" Junior replies: "But Dad! You steal satellite signals!".
The commercial then cuts to a message to the effect of "theft is theft. stealing satellite signals is a crime. Sponsored by your local cable companies".
The first time I saw this, I would have sworn it was going to be a commercial paid for by the satellite providers in Canada. Nope, looks like the cable co's are feeling the pinch of DTV piracy in Canada (arrr matey).
Blatantly wrong propaganda such as this turns my stomach, but they sure have my parents convinced - they now are very nervous about the cryptography course I'm taking next year, because I told them I could use that knowledge to help decrpyt satellite signals.
Nice world we live in, eh?
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
I'm getting really sick and tired of BS like this. There is such a big business push about respecting copyright laws, yet very little showing the flipside of the coin.
For instance, I recently saw LXG. Paid $9.50 at 2:30pm on a Saturday and saw the show. I didn't care for the movie. It wasn't worth my money. While I could 'pirate' it, I won't because it is simply not worth the space.
I'm all for movies making money. I love the great work some artists do and people should respect that. However, respect is a two way street. Coming out of an over priced movie feeling ripped off shows a lack of respect for movie patrons.
Each of the system of control are enjoying a field day. The media rights are saying that if an employee is enjoying their life then they should enjoy freedoms beyond those that are fair or right. Consider the money you spent, that grip that wants to work in the movies, what are they getting as a percentage of the industry's income? Its like showing a video of a builder then asking that the architect gettting 1m per house?
Actually, Sinbad was computer generated.
Wait, he's engaged to J-Lo. I guess we should pity him. Am I the only one who, upon hearing that they had hooked up, felt an overpowering urge to leap onto the nearest table and shout, "NO! BEN! YOU FOOL!"
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
John Travolta ...
Everybody else that got near Battlefield Earth
Kevin Costner
The cast of Town and Country
Gah... can't think of any other bombs or perpetual stinkers right now...
*honk*
This is my sig. It's prescription, I swear. I need it for reading things... on the other side of things
"Featuring starving artists in the movie industry."
Hey, We'll see Macaulay Culkin again!
Italicized are quoted from: http://www.respectcopyrights.org/popup/why-3.html
Have you ever had your computer crash and had to replace it or reinstall all the files due to a virus or other such problem? The nature of "peer-to-peer" file sharing sites like eDonkey, Gnutella, KaZaA, etc., open your computer to destructive viruses and worms and annoying pop-ups. Common Viruses: Apher, Benjamin, Backdoor, Duload, Fizzer, Hantner, Klez, Neuer, Nimda, Livra and Magic Eightball
The nature of peer-to-peer is NOT to "open the computer to destructive viruses and worms and annoying pop-ups." This is a common misconception. Peer-to-peer is a tool and technlogy. Peer-to-peer is a techology that is designed to evolve the distribution channel from the traditional server-client to client(also a server)-otherclients(also servers). There are advantages since it relieves bandwidth from the server. Peer-to-peer is a useful tool of distribution especially when the distributor does not have the manpower to distribute their work. It can especially be useful for independent musicians and amateur directors who do not have the resources. Since peer-to-peer is a technology, it can also be abused. I agree with that but peer-to-peer technology offers tremendous outcome. Though in many people's minds, peer-to-peer is linked to pirating, peer-to-peer is NOT pirating. It is simply a technology. The nature of peer-to-peer is not to open the computer for viruses/popups. Though Kazaa and several other programs do include malware/spyware into their programs, they are not the total of one technology. They are only one implementaiton of a technology. Kazaa also has many legal materials and offers an efficient method of distribution. Second, Gnutella is NOT a peer-to-peer site. Gnutella is a peer-to-peer network. Programs that implement Gnutella such as Gnucleus and others are programs. There are also many Gnutella clients out there that are open source such as Gnucleus. You can inspect the code to see if there is any relation of viruses or spyware.
You also become a distribution source for illegal downloading of movies, music and more, which makes you just as responsible if you had downloaded the movie yourself. Network users have a back door to your hard drive while you're online, thereby seeing your personal, private information, such as bank records, social security number, etc. Is the theft of your personal information worth the free movie?
Please show evidence of this. I do not have any knowledge of this. Most file sharing programs that implement peer-to-peer technology has limited access to the hard drive (usually a specified directory). Unless the user specified to share the files related to their personal information or there are no bugs in the file sharing program, I do not understand how they have a backdoor.
Does anyone else think that showing the commercials at movie theaters won't make the problem any better?
The people there are already paying for (at least some) of the movies they watch), and you're just going to tell the clueless people that they don't have to. Having the ad pop-up on Kazaa, that would be worthwhile.
----------
I am an expert in electricity. My father held the chair of applied electricity at the state prision.
And who, exactly, might these "friends" be? France, Germany, Russia? Bah. Only a handful of countries had the grapes to change a regime that has practiced genocide for a generation and has blatantly disregarded UN resolutions for more than a decade. OK, the WMD spin was used to try to increase global support.... Did it work? Nope. Did it matter? Nope. This is one case where the end justifies the means, and anybody who says otherwise is either a socialist or an uber-liberal, or a dirty Frenchie.
With the birth of scientific theories in the middle ages, modernism was born the idea that our surroundings could be known and understood, a prevailing notion that there are in fact absolute truths. Society will continue to grow in this knowledge and become better as a whole. Two world wars and a great depression, started people doubting and Postmodernism sprang forth. An antithesis to modernism, no absolute truth, things are know only relative to other things. This effected all areas of life for people, what starts as a subject tossed around by "high thinkers" in a decade permeates our lives. Political correctness came from the post modern culture, and does indeed seem to hold to the same kind of idea. So I guess were both right (how postmodern!)
where can I download this 30-second spot?
"If your agenda is to educate, it's knowldege. If it's something else, it's propaganda."
-Sean Kennedy
What do you suppose the RIAA's agenda is?
As a cinemaphile and aspiring director, he's DEAD ON! ...damn I wish I had mod points.
(Please Note: Not flamebait ... just my 2 cents :)
/. always seems so surprised/outraged/disenfranchised when the MPAA/RIAA etc. do something like this. Sure they might be the "big bad corporation of America Inc. who don't run Linux" but the truth is that they're losing money because a select number of individuals are stealing *their* intellectual property. Do you really expect them to sit there and do nothing? Welcome to the REAL world of business.
Does anyone else find it strange that
But it looks like it's already been fixed. That was quick!
This just goes to show how completely and utterly out of touch with reality the MPAA is.
I AM a starving artist in the film industry, and it's not because of piracy, I can tell you that much right now.
Nobody has stolen my work. Frankly, I wouldn't mind if someone did, because at least I'd be getting exposure...
The main reason why artists in the film industry starve, is pretty simple:
THE STUDIOS ARE IN IT FOR THE MONEY, NOT ART.
So, they will hire those who make the most money, not the best artists. Why else do you think Michael Bay gets to direct? It's not because he's an artist (Far from it). It's because he knows how to stage action, and action sells tickets.
It's the same bullshit story as with the music industry. A handful of people get promoted to death so the corporation that they have a contract with can make as much money as possible in the shortest amount of time.
In the meantime, real artists, whose appeal isn't as bland and generic (read: mainstream) are left to fight for the crumbs.
So, these commercials do nothing to end the starvation of artists. They are primarily designed to further the wealth of the few that are already getting paid more than they're worth.
I'd go so far as to say they have a better chance of increasing the number of people who starve.
It's not because of piracy that movies lose money. Movies lose money if they don't have a marketing blitz promoting it. Even the biggest bombs at the box office still break even for the studios through video sales. The only movies actually LOSING money are independent features that might have something to say other than "hey look at that explosion, isn't that cool?".
The studios are not STARVING... not by any stretch of the imagination. The ones starving, are the people the studios screw over.
The attitude here is "we could be making more".
-- This sig for rent.
Like Clint Eastwood or Martin Sheen? Are they really starving?
If they wanted to prove a point, they would use actors who are really starving, but then they are getting paid to be in the commerecials so they can eat... Or, the studios could stop taking in so much money for themselves and pay more to the extras and bit players.
"Don't confuse the issue with facts!"
Where can I pirate the commercials?
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
It's not very often that I can't find anything better to do with my time than contribute money to the Entertainment Industry (meaning MPAA, RIAA, etc, not small live shows or indie bands). Granted, movies are entertaining. So is talking to people. Or sports. Or use your imagination, if you have any left. Why the hell should I want mass produced industrial entertainment anyways? Art has been around far longer the means to make insane amounts of money off it.
Take your movies and shove 'em.
>> ..selling albums is not the optimal way for artists to receive compensation...
...artists often forget that once the unnecessary middlemen are cut out of the picture, there is plenty of money to be made in concerts alone.
Says who? In any case, how an artist wants to make money is a matter for that artist, and no one else.
>> Pre-recorded albums should be free promotional material and a service to the fans.
Self-serving bunk. People can try to sell whatever they want. Your use of "should" implies a moral judgment at work. Morality has nothing to do with this. As my mother used to say, people in hell want ice water. And you just want free CD's.
>>
First, it's a safe bet that every entertainer knows there's money in selling tickets to a performance. Second, what's with that "unnecessary middleman" stuff? You want someone to be a fullt-time entertainer and fly their own planes, do their own accounting, arrange their own bookings, run their own payroll, act as their own lawyers, write their own contracts, prepare their own taxes, etc.?? Without middlemen, those bands you keep referring to as "artists" would never break out of the college bar circuits.
In general, just one more immature post trying to dress simple greed in bogus moralistic rationalizations.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Featuring starving artists in the movie industry
;-)
I can see it now: An unamed Hollywood corporation tells Arnie that they cannot afford to pay him his usual x million for his next movie due to the large number of copyright infringements on his last movie.
Struggling blockbuster artists being starved of income can no longer afford their daily living costs and are forced to settle for silver-plated toilet seats this year instead of the gold-plated variety. Sheya right! Arnie and many others would simply say "Asta la vista baby!"
Right on the money!
I suppose my TiVo will skip through this commercial just like all others. Yet another reason why $12.95/mo is better than regular TV.
....the duality of American corporate culture. Ad spots and web sites devoted to helping the average worker, then the moves to outsource any job overseas. If the actors/actresses in other countries spoke perfect English, were white, and worked for less there would be no movie production industry in the USA. Less talk about "starving artists" and more talk about bottom line. (but that wouldn't be a very effective ad campaign now would it)
Doesn't it seem funny that the site is respectcopyrights.org? The .org domain is for organizations "not for profit," right? I'm sensing a bit of a contradiction here...
I agree! And on the other hand, are any of you Linux kernel hackers mad about what SCO is doing? It seems like there's double standards here. Is music/movies somehow immune?
Since no Hollywood movie has ever shown a profit (just ask Art Buchwald)!!!!!
(Ref: Art Buchwald and the "Coming to America" case).
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
Probably because others have come to realize the unreasonable extremism of your stance. I concede that the current state of the copyright and patent systems is absurd and insane, but Ifind nothing wrong with reasonable copyrights and patents.
We tend to accept what we're used to. Many people accept the war on drugs, many people accepted slavery, many people accepted witch trials. In any given age there are certain things which are "common wisdom" which turn out to be utterly, hopelessly wrong. The reason they are common wisdom is mainly that poeple tend to rationalize the conditions they live under.
unreasonable extremism
That's not an argument. It is nothing but the voice of common wisdom crushing dissent as usual. What does "extremism" mean? Extremely what? Extremely true? Extremely correct? How are those criticisms? "Extremism" isn't a valid criticism; it only implies a criticism by appealing to the reader's sense that anything very different from today's common wisdom is foolish or dangerous.
I think the reason the IP situation has gotten so bad is that the very idea is fundamentally flawed. There is no core sanity in the idea, and therefore there is nothing putting the brakes on increasing insanity. If there were some sane, sensible compromise between zero IP and insane IP, then justice would tend to find it. But justice is not finding it.
The defense of IP is fundamentally different from the defense of ordinary property rights. Ordinary property rights are unavoidable, they are necessary, because at most one person (or a few people) can use one thing (one toothbrush, one bicycle, one house, one shirt) at a time, and so there inevitably will be a rule resolving the inevitable conflicts that arise when two people try to use the same thing. Intellectual property is utterly different, because it is entirely physically possible for any number of people to play the same song at the same time.
IP must justify itself. People who defend IP must present their justification. They don't realize it, but they do. The only serious defense of IP that I am aware of is economic - i.e., that IP must be defended for society's good because it encourages creation. However, while there is superficial plausibility to the argument, there are many arguments against it, and so there must be some calculation to weigh the benefits of IP to the economy against the costs of IP to the economy. I have never seen a good attempt to demonstrate this.
Consider the case of Linux. Linux is created and given freely. Its existence demonstrates that a first-class piece of software can be, and will be, created for free. Its very existence seriously undermines the economic case for IP.
The total cost for T3 was $180M USD. Forget breaking it down into actors, producers, Dan the Construction Guy -- just $180M.
Up here in Canada, we've got this organisation called World Vision (might be in the US too, dunno). For $33 a month, you can sponsor a child in a third world country. BEAR WITH ME.
Now, convert $180M USD into CDN funds --> 254,840,391.06. So, instead of making one single movie (just the cost for the movie, not even including profit!), they could have:
sponsored 1 child for 7,722,436 months (about 643,000 years)
sponsored 10 children for around 64,000 years
a thousand kids for 643 years
***50,000*** kids for 12 years -- the typical amount of time that a child gets sponsored.
This is one freaking movie out of millions and millions that Hollywood (not to mention the rest of the world) has made. Imagine if, instead of these actors, producers, and Dan the Construction guy decided to not make movies, but instead help out the rest of the world. What would happen? Would we have an end to world hunger? I think so.
Now stop all the damn whining about "starving artists," Hollywood. Even good ol' Dan the Construction Guy or the roadies who work on a film eat better than most of the world does. MPAA, if you're reading this, you should be ashamed of yourself.
Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
I'll be selling the ads on DVD on the corner of Broadway and 34th tommorow morning. Ask for Vito....
Bite me, bitch.
Clearly, the solution is to download MPGs, QuickTime MOVs, and MP4 video files. I hear they're biodegradable!
Oh my OGG, I hope I don't have to take too much FLAC for this comment.
Oh yeah, why don't they just remake "Don't copy that floppy" into "Don't copy that betamax" and air that?
Ron Paul 2012
blah blah blah ...unreasonable extremism ... blah blah blah
Uh, I hate to tell you this, but democracy was considered extreme, free speech and free markets extreme, free religion extreme, remember those extreme people who wanted to abolish slavery rather than compromise with the slave states, and even quantum mechanics was considered extreme.
For god's sake, I think if you worried about being rational as much as you did being extreme - you might have figured out by now that just because an institution calls something a right does not mean that is is. And that property rights derive from physical limits, and not personal incentive or wishfull thinking. And that all the problems with IP are a symptom of something and didn't just magically happen.
Instead of worrying about being extreme, lets worry about being right. Otherwise we have doomed ourselves to worthlessness.
http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=68468&ci d=6264545
Which is the funniest thing I've ever seen. Bookmark it now!
If there were some sane, sensible compromise between zero IP and insane IP, then justice would tend to find it.
I think the original US copyright laws we had were sane. They said that if someone profits off of a copyrighted work then the creator can sue to capture those profits. Lawsuits are extremely effective against commercial exploitation of a work. Copyright was NOT intended to stiffle the non-commercial uses of a work.
The problem is that when I suggest that is the correct solution people tend to accuse me of wanting to abolish copyright entirely because it wouldn't forbid P2P. Even with P2P being legal, works would still have a variety of commercial uses and creators would still get paid.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
as an actualy starving artist, it fucking offends me to have a bunch of fat cats force feed us a bunch of BS about internet piracy causing a decline in media sales.
BULL SHIT! It's the entire economy right now.
As an actual artist i would be more than happy to someone download my work, for free no less. If your into making art for money, insted of just trying to get your ideas to as many people as posible, then you are a sell-out-whore, not an artist.
(wise up, stealing is good)
flame on...
-makoffee
That plumber can't fix more than one toilet at a time. An idea can be copied an infinite amount of times. Got the difference now?
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
Our partners at www.melano.tv created a Sci-Fi short on a Mac for $2k and it looks better than everything on the SCFI channel since they cancelled Farscape. Give them a million bucks and they'll make all the freakin' X-Men movies you want!
Hollywood is trying to protect their artificial market. Let them eat cake.
How can they possibly claim that they are not able to make a profit when they can afford to pay the actors such high fees?
Beginning Friday, July 25, every major exhibitor in the country will donate time to play daily trailers on all screens in more than 5,000 theaters across the United States.
Hasn't anyone read Abby Hoffman (a.k.a Free)? This one aspect sinks their whole campaign. How? Simple.
When you are in a theater...
It shouldn't take too many people doing it (if they are a little persistant) to reach a critical mass where it becomes the thing to do (tm) when the ad comes on.
The take home message will be the exact opposite of what the MPAA wants it to be; people will think jeeze, I'm not alone--lots of other people excercise their fair use rights too!
-- MarkusQ
Starving artists like Arnie, Spielberg, George Lucas, Harrison Ford?
I'm sure they really care about the small guys whose work would actually be given a boost by cheap publicity.
Where are the dollar theatres? At one time, people were able to make a living running movies, cheap. It was something to do. You could pay a dollar and go see Videodrome or Zardoz or Eraserhead, and they kept theatres running.
Now, the whole market's been taken up by juggernauts like Cineplex Odeon.
When movies no longer cost $8 for 90 minutes of dogshit preceded by 15 minutes of loud obnoxious commercials and military advertisements (and many times, the movies themselves end up being thinly disguised military propaganda) THEN I will consider having a little pity for those poor malnourished souls at the big movie houses.
Had to switch to bottom of the barrel caviar, eh? This is the revenge of GenX against the economy that gave us the shaft... I hope you choke on your watered down, overpriced diet coke.
Intolerance for ambiguity is the mark of the authoritarian personality.
Maybe you should re-think and/or at least question the usurious nature of your record contracts.
Nothing gets pirated more than software. What kept them from turning into a bunch of "you-know-whats"? It's not our fault if they can't adjust to free market forces. The public isn't here to babysit Hollywood when they fail to keep up with the times.
What kind of world do they want to create? Just take a look at the Terms Of Use they think their website needs - that ALL websites presumably require.
NINE PAGES of terms and conditions that you MUST somehow agree to and that you are somehow BOUND by. Just to veiw their website.
I really love the last paragraph:
Respectcopyrights.org may at any time revise these Terms and Conditions by updating this posting. You are bound by any such revisions and should therefore periodically visit this page to review the then current Terms and Conditions to which you are bound.
Yep, just by looking at their site we are bound by everything they wrote, and everything they add to it. Even if we never look at their site again after they change it. We better check daily - wouldn't want to miss the fact that we are suddenly bound to shave our eyebrows because we once looked at their site.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Commercial entertainers and artists have different objectives. There are enough artists out there, to keep the rest of us entertained. Movies, music, etc. will get produced regardless of the commercial potential. Hollywood is bitching because they can't envision the continued stream the sick money they're accustomed to making in a broadband Internet, "anybody can be a filmmaker with a camcorder and editing program" world. They better go to church if they're looking for sympathy.
http://www.ninjaculture.com/articles/057.asp
Wow, are we going to see a re-vival of DP, the Disk Protector? What's his catch line going to be this time?
You do have a point: highly controversial movie "Kent Park" is probably never going to show in America, so people traded the movie files.
To show some counter examples to counter your thoughts on profitability,
"My Big Fat Greek Wedding" This film's screener was traded everywhere because it was showing for months and it didn't reach many rural areas when the words got out. It still trumps other big budget films for months. It's a dating movie. Anyone who is too cheap to buy tix don't deserve a date anyway.
"Blair Witch Project" workprint was traded over one month before it went into the theater but still made a huge hit. Frankly I'd rather watch it at home cuz it gave me motion sickness watching big screen.
Small budget has small burdens to break even. For example, "Clerks" was a big hit made on a $3000 budget, black and white low quality film. and there are many people out there who are willing to pay less than $10 for a good movie, action or not.
People don't calculate cost-benefit before going to movies; it's entertainment.
Just curious.
Thanks.
And without all the behind-the-scenes experts who generally are seen by the public only during the credits, there is no movie using current generation motion picture industry technology. So they have nothing to fear from piracy.
The Hollywood film industry technical experts only have to fear their jobs being outsourced out from under them and their being largely replaced by the technology we develop.
While a makeup artist is probably going to be necessary for quite some time (though I can imagine the color changes now done in makeup done digitally) for the stars, if the extras don't need either costumes or makeup because their only existence is virtual, there are a lot of jobs going away.
In any case, the issue is control, just like it is with the record industry. They fear that the next Spielberg is going to go direct to DVD and Internet distribution once the technology ramps up a bit and one can do full Hollywood-quality pictures on a desktop and a small video-card based render farm, and they want to make new distribution and promotion channels for independents unavailable.
If they actually gave a fuck about piracy, they'd be going after the Asian pirates with their own DVD pressing plants working and selling more or less openly.
In general, only the suits in the industry have anything to fear from future technological development in the current timeframe, if the movie industry follows the RIAA labels into oblivion, the stars will simply cut deals directly with directors and probably make more money than ever, and the best of the technical experts will keep right on working, probably also making more money than ever.
Tech Public Policy stuff
IANAL and here's my moral dilemma. ...but... if we all stop pirating m0viez and musik and start supporting artists, thus we all become legit, we won't have any stu^H^H^H moral lawsuits. Thus the lawyers will become unemployed, will start being ripped of by the same executives that were getting rich in the first case.
Obviously supporting piracy cuts in the large pockets of execu^H^H^H^H^H poor artists and makes them rich as ^H^H^H^H^H^H starve to death.
BUT!
Now think about it. We have (FAR) more lawyers than artists. Is it fair to pick the artists over lawyers?! You see my dilemma.
End even more, when did one of these artists ever contributed a good story to our beloved slashdot?! But without lawyers... next it's gonna be the government and we're gonna loose and *entire* section here!!!
Laugh. It's funny. No seriously, it really is funny!
__________
Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace!
...or at least that's the opinion of this guy, who makes a powerful, powerful, powerful point:
HERE
Besides, just imagine how many thousands of us have watched that Star Wars stickfighting kid's video without paying him a dime. Struggling performance artists like him deserve our financial support.
Phallic Symbols in LOTR
This media blitz is just designed to remove the ablity to claim you didnt know what you were doing was wrong for when they drag your butt into court.
They know just telling people on tv wont stop diddly, and might even make more people realize its possible and try it.
Next, after the smoke clears from the *AA's, it will be the BSA's turn to go after the people that are left standing.
They all suck and should be wiped off the face of the earth.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
How long until someone registers this domain, and throws up a parody page?
;-)
o 1 hour
o 1 day
o 1 week
o never
o it's already done, slowpoke!
o Cowboy Neal did it yesterday
Confused? Read the story!
Okay. This is a big frikin' rant but there's probably some unbiased truth in it. You be the judge.
If the attitudes reflected here on Slashdot represent a significant amount of the attitudes in the so called "real world," then I would argue that the advertisement's message is ineffective. Much of the criticism is directed at the portrayal of piracy harming the independent filmmaker and the people who work in the movie industry in jobs that pay salary or hourly wage.
Some separation needs to be made here. Most people who work on the movies get their money as wage or salary before the movie hits the theaters and on down the distribution chain making money for the producer who made the initial capital investment to make the movie in the first place. Pirating the movie does not directly reduce their income, but an unprofitable film will hurt the production company that DOES pay their wage or salary. So, it's fairly obvious that these people will be indirectly affected by piracy. Yet we seem to loose sight of that, preferring to think of the corporations or mega-stars who are more directly affected. This is a rationalization defense mechanism.
The independent filmmaker suffers not so much because of movie piracy but because these media gatekeepers (producers) have decided their work unworthy of (or rather unprofitable in) mainstream consumption. Yet their plight is used as propaganda by these same gatekeepers in a selfish attempt to wax their own waning gains in profit.
I say cut the bullcrap. Piracy is illegal. Piracy does indirectly harm hardworking people. Does it harm businesses and wealthy people more? Yes. Does that make it right? No.
The MPAA and RIAA need to cut the bullcrap to. Stop telling us that your primary interest in fighting piracy the artists. It's political posturing, we see through it, and it hurts your argument. A better message: the truth. The media production and distribution industry does make millions, even billions. Piracy harms THAT bottom line MOST. Piracy is against the law, and as a business you have a vested interest in preventing it. As consumers we have an interest in large scale media distribution, as it brings to the world sights and sounds that would otherwise not reach so far away from an artist or performer's particular location. Assuming we are conscientious consumers we also have an interest in making sure that the original artists and performers are fairly compensated for their original works.
No doubt many of you are saying "Ah! Large scale media distribution companies often do NOT fairly compensate artists." So what. That does not make piracy right, and pirating the media is not helping the artist. If we want better compensation for artists then we should get of our Slashdot reading asses and get political. Fight for the rights of artists instead of whining about how they are getting stepped on.
Show me one starving artist on the streets of Hollywood or Beverly Hills that works in the movie industry. Surely Arnie isn't starving. :D
You must master your joystick like a fisherman masters bait! - Gimpy
... hundreds of other people who work on films that make enough money to get by in life. Even on those same films. Just because Jim Carrey made $20 million for Cable Guy, there are still electricians, lighting, cameramen, editors, etc. who put in their effort and labor to make the movie happen.
Downloading a first-run in theater movie and watching them for free is stealing. It is breaking the social contract that drives our economy. End of story.
Movies may be overpriced - but so is bottled water. Does this give us the right to steal bottles of water from the local 7-11?
Movies may be intellectually devoid - but junk food is devoid of nutrition. Does this give us the right to steal from McDonalds?
NO.
The arguments I've seen in this thread are fucking >>PATHETIC coming from so-called smart techno-nerds such as yourselves. Downloading movies or music that the owner charges for is stealing.
End of story.
... you don't want to be stealing from the MPAA, the RIAA and the television networks as well, do you?
Attack its weak point for massive damage!
... instead of big name stars find people who played memorable supporting roles and bit character actors.
"Hi, My name is joe and I played this part and that part. I don't make millions of dollars in hollywood. In fact, my yearly income for the past few years has been about that of a (teacher, plumber, etc.). I get paid because people go to see movies, and they pay to see movies. When you download a movie and watch it for free - you are not only stealing from big business, but you are stealing from me. Because if movies don't get made, I don't work. Movie piracy is stealing from average american workers like me."
(and please, no "Hi I'm Troy McClure" retorts).
If you have not seen it yet, I can make a copy for you...
Now we've found out what the RIAA is REALLY going to do with the money they steal from "innocent" youths! Buy air time on networks!!
Fsckd.
If the studios close, and the actors and actresses fade away, does this mean we'll get to watch great Indie movies instead of this rehashed trash?
I've finally got a fan! Now what do I feed him?
The theaters already show about 20 minutes of advertisements before each movie, and this is after I already paid to see the thing! They waste 20 minutes of my time for what, a nickel? Now they're going to add a 65 second PSA to the wasted time. Don't forget, the people going to the movie are paying customers. If they were downloading movies off of the internet instead of seeing it in the theater, they wouldn't be there.
This makes as much sense as forcing patrons of a retail store to listen to a 65 second speech about how shoplifing is bad before they are allowed to pay the cashier.
I go to movies for the chance I may see something insightful. They don't deliver that very well, and they want me to sit through a bunch of commercials as well. What point is there in going to a movie anymore? The entertainment cartel just wants to waste my time no matter how much I pay. I used to go to some movies because I thought the companies who made them weren't so bad. I don't see how wasting the time of paying customers would help their cause--assuming stoping copyright infringement is their real motive. Then again, I suppose if you're paying money to a MPAA company, you're an unwitting collaborator to their fascist plots. Screw them all.
Amount Lost to Pirates: 1.5 Million Dollars
Price Spent on Advertising: 10 Million Dollars
The Look on the face of the 16 year old kid the MPAA busted: Priceless
a) she has a physical copy
b) she legally obtained the physical copy
c) she doesn't retain a copy of the one she gave you
If you don't return it, they either need to hunt you down or use another legally obtained copy.
Is it really that hard to tell the difference?
Ben
Work Safe Porn
I would be hard to sell those gals...
I'll bet you would. {wink, wink, nudge, nudge}
BEST TYPO EVAR!
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
That's money wasted, that could otherwise have been spent on lawsuits and the persecution of file-sharers. Good job, I say. The MPAA can join history's ranks upon ranks of meaningless organizations that wailed and gnashed their teeth over piracy, and accomplished nothing.
Someone e-mail them (I'm too paranoid) and ask them if Sony Pictures ever forked over the money for the rights (IP huh?) to make Spiderman.
Last I heard, at least, was that Stan was to get 10% of the 600 Million they made. Yet they said, oops... we don't have it anymore.
If that argument works for them then they will understand that I'll buy their music/movies/software when I've got the cash and I'll just rip them off until them.
I mean let's face it. If you are downloading stuff only because it's free.. or to sell it... that is wrong. But if you simply can't afford, or will never be able to afford the product you haven't made them lose any revenue at all.
See, the whole thing is silly when I think about the sex and violence that is pushed on movie-goers. Yes, and I'm 22 and think this. I don't really have a problem with it, but when their response to censorship (parents) groups is "Fuck Off!"... I say to them "Fuck Off!"
You see, these folks are like Microsoft. If the gov't/whoever told them tommorrow to stop doing this or that they won't and likely buy/sell/sue whoever asks.
I'm really just waiting for a song to be used in a movie and have that upset everyone. When will these AA people fight it out and just die?
Get your Unix fortune now!
> Wow your right the filmmakers that make movies like American Pie really "dare" to tackle hard hitting subjects.
You're using one bad example to chastise an entire artform. That's a straw-man, again.
I also take issue that art has anything to do with morality. The crowd that chants this mantra are also the ones that think sports players are role models. It looks like some people can't let art be or acknowledge that some things are simply professions and not expressions of new social mores.
>postmodern culture: Everyone's ideas are right except people that don't agree that everyone's ideas are right
That's cute, but I'd rather be advocating free expression in the arts than categorically making generalizations about some nebulous group of people. Free expression means accepting ideas you don't like, playing the morality card is not accepting these ideas. Its no surprise that the morality crowd, e.g. censors, religious groups, moralists, etc are the ones who actively engage in censorship attempts.
Seems to me there are two paths here, tolerating "immoral Hollywood" or engaging in intolerance. I can't see how someone can defend the latter.
Ironically, the film that gets hurt most by pirating is pornography. It has limited distribution and limited legal funds. The morality crowd has had kittens since the porno industry began, do these "immoral" people not deserve IP rights also? Are they part of this "Immoral Hollywood" you call hypocrites?
It's easy to get anything you want on the air if you're a freebander! ;-)
BTW, the movies studios own most of the TV networks--at least all the over the air ones I know about. ABC - Disney. Fox - News Corp. WB - AOL/TW. UPN/CBS - Paramount/Viacom. That is why they're offering to show the ads for free.
>|<*:=
When you copy that floppy, better not be sloppy, or you'll end up on HardCopy.
Why is the penatly for sharing music online much greater (up to 100k per song allegedy) than the penalty for getting caught shoplifting the CD from the store?
What message is this sending? Physcially stealing something is ok?
I love the clipart they chose to represent my computer being "vulnerable." A freaking biohazard sign. Who needs to overclock when apparently P2P might make my CPU go nuclear.
(I also love how most of the viruses listed are e-mail worms that have never been an issue on P2P netowrks)
It's not stupid. It's advanced.
"Says who? In any case, how an artist wants to make money is a matter for that artist, and no one else."
What is this supposed to mean? It proves nothing. The question is still on whether preventing copying should be enforced. It is a question of law that was meant to promote art. Does prevntion of "piracy" (as they call it, but is not the same since it is not physical) help promote progress in art? Do some research yourself, and don't let the RIAA (which profits from limiting and pricing as they choose, an intangible good) tell you otherwise.
"You want someone to be a fullt-time entertainer and fly their own planes, do their own accounting, arrange their own bookings, run their own payroll, act as their own lawyers, write their own contracts, prepare their own taxes, etc.?? Without middlemen, those bands you keep referring to as "artists" would never break out of the college bar circuits."
Do they need their own planes? How to fly them? Do they need to do their own accounting? Why can't those that run events hire artists to play at their next event? Do the artists need an accountant for that? No, they simply make a deal with the event organizers. They play where they want when they want. If they are popular, more bars/event organizers/radio stations/concert organizers/tour organizers/etc. will seek their service. Why do copyrights and lawyers have to be involved besides finding a way to fund the recording industry? I like many see the recording industry as a marketing medium. Make CD's to sell at concerts for a dollar (without restrictions) to promote the artists. Allow radio stations to play music to promote artists. Distribute music online for promotion. Have websites and radio stations rank what is most popular and present some of the newer artists. Why do companies need to have so much control over our culture? Music is part of our culture. Why should music be treated so often as a product and not a service? Why should lawyers be involved in every part of our life?
The current system of paying artists to play at concerts/tours/events/etc. is not the only way to do it. Middlemen can be cut out easily. Especially since they were placed there by an artificial system created by business tycoons a long time ago.
"In general, just one more immature post trying to dress simple greed in bogus moralistic rationalizations."
Who is the dresser? The industry calling copyright infringement (a law, not one based on ethics but economy) stealing or piracy? or is the dresser the people trying to take back their culture of sharing traditions/music/culture/etc.? Owning culture is not unethical? but trying to share it is?
Question everything.
ad featuring an artist explaining that he/she is starving because of the "take it or leave it" standard industry contract
I imagine that one of those self-serve labels such as CD Baby will put up a commercial similar to what you describe.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Is the business model of many media companies not appropriate today? Perhaps--maybe even probably.
Do actors, musicians, etc. get quite a bit of money for what they do? Of course.
Will the studio or actor or director or stagehand miss the money from the relatively small number of pirated copies that are made? Of course not.
Does this make theft right? Never.
"Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
I'm sympathetic to these artists ...
... at least, not ouside of prison ;)
So I'll give them payment the same way I'd give a bum on the street charity - I'll send them some food.
Hey! At least I know it won't be used to buy drugs and alcohol
Yeah, let's get a hold of those asshole extremist cocksucking body-nazis, their FUD machine is already spinning at full speed.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
how are trailers to a film supposed to stop film piracy? don't they understand? pirates don't rip the trailers! and pirates have no need to go to the theators! or at least that is what i heard... from a friend... because watching pirated movies is wrong and sends you straight to hell.
> Do you see how MEN conduct themselves on the world stage, instead of sniveling and whining
.
:)
HAHAHAHA, MEN like Condoleeza Rice and that fucking ugly bitch on the state department briefing. Now Saddam, boy he knew how to treat his women . .
> . . . . and has blatantly disregarded UN resolutions for more than a decade.
LOL!! Ummmm dude . . . . oh just forget it . . . I know for a fact that you are WAY TOO FUCKING LIMITED to appreciate the irony.
TROLL ME BACK TROLL!!!! Punch those keys with your hatred!!! I'll be Long gone!!! LOL
does the MPAA ever consider the fact that they are getting their DVDs mass produced in a country (china) that has virtually no copyright laws (information for the people)?
maybe they should consider investing on internal, secure companies rather than sending their information into a copyright abyss.
I wonder if its occured to the *AA that sales are down
not because of piracy but for another reason entirely.
I put it to you that the 'starving' artists
and the product that they're trying to push SUCK?
The teeny boppers have grown up.
siggy played guitar
I like the idea. Perhaps we could also have anti-RIAA ads modeled after the government's anti-drug ads, like what the Detroit Project did.
Is it okay to support corporate greed if it's only a little bit?
So you buy an RIAA CD occasionally.
It's not like you're paying millions of dollars to finance a music cartel and all the poverty and lawsuits it creates.
And you understand the argument that RIAA money contributes to terrible things.
That if you buy an RIAA CD, your money goes to people who are responsible for bankrupting college students, using their influence in Congress to threaten our civil liberties, clogging the courts with lawsuits and forcing musicians into abusive one-sided contracts. That if you stopped buying RIAA CDs, the dealers would go away, the abuse of monopoly would end.
You get all that.
But it's just one CD, right?
Well, here's a secret: You don't pick which side you're on by how much you buy.
You pick which side you're on by buying in the first place.
Remember the days when Republicans were the party of fiscal responsibility?
Trying to shut down Kazaa is going to be like when they attacked Napster. It will only create more "publicity" for Kazaa causing more people to "flock" to the DL Software. There is no way to stop this online trend, and the "scares" that they have been posting such as "Emptying your Bank Account" or "Suing you for $150,000", have done nothing. Online DL is the future and theres no way to stop it.....
It'll be just like Americas war on drugs, you certainly can't buy drugs in America anymore can you?
"Do not underestimate the power of the human spirit," -- Shinnok, Mortal Kombat Annihilation. A movie, that says the human spirit is persistent, has probably been pirated thousands of times because of that very human spirit. "You are in imperfect being created by an imperfect being. Finding your weakness is only a matter of time," -- The Borg Queen, Star Trek First Contact. It's only a matter of time before someone finds a way around the latest effort to stop piracy. Everything has a weakness.
So I go to a theater, pay my ten dollars, and they make me sit through yet another frickin' commercial?
And they wonder why I'd rather download a movie off the net than go see it in a theater?
"It sure was strange to see something on Usenet about me that didn't involve Klingon gang rape." -- Wil Wheaton
How to screw the public part one.
... Your ass is fired.
Scene: Office at the *AA. A meeting is in progress.
CEO: Sales are down. My poor artists are gonna starve.
(pauses to scoop caviar into his fat gaping maw)
Peon 1: The public have finally woken up to the fact
that we're selling em a heap of rehashed shit
and that our starving artists are a bunch of
whining talentless morons.
CEO: Impossible
Peon 2: Must be those pesky downloaders again boss.
(Kisses CEO's fat quivering ass)
CEO: You're right lets sue their lame asses.
Peon 2: I'll need to budget some ads.
CEO: Good idea. Use some of those whining talentless
morons we've got on the payroll.
siggy played guitar
If the starving artists need money, then WTF are the moron moguls paying mega millions to certain actors, eg. Rene Zelwiger just to get fat when HEAPS of underpaid female actresses are *already* flamin FAT!
I'm sure Arnie et al, can afford, much better than I, to donate a few bucks to the poor actors.
Let them clean up their own mess before preaching morality.
"Gee, Ted, we should try to cut down on movie piracy. Do you have any ideas?"
"Actually, me and the boys were discussing this over lunch the other way. How about we have public service announcements in theaters to annoy the moviegoers who have already paid $7 for a ticket to see 'Bruce Almighty', and show them the overworked, underpaid carpenters, painters, camera grips, and extras to help them forget the fact that Jim Carrey got paid $25 million to star in this P.O.S. movie?"
"Sounds great, Ted! I love preaching to the choir, how about you?"
HAHAHAHAHAAH
:-) Starving artists in a western country. hehe...
:-(
AHHAHAAHAHAHAHA
Euh, oh wait, sorry for the laughter, this is actually possible in the US. Xcuse me
Have these not already been launched? I remember seeing one while legally downloading music from iTMS
Take away the overproduced crap that gets pushed to the masses and what do you have. No musicianship, creativity stiffled by the produce a hit factory industry. In general a complete decline in vocal, instrumental, harmonic, rythmic skills has occured. The music industry is going for a shit because they have lost track of the one thing that will always sell to a small and large audiance and keep the piper paid, great musicianship! I do not pirate music because, I would rather listen in person and buy great cds directly from the artist than buy todays commercial crap. The artistry of Lawrence Juber, The Kentucky Head Hunters or Micheal Lorimer is a good example.
10,000 stoned out jump and jive fans making more noise than a 7000 watt stage production with laser, pyros and all the other commercial shit is boring as hell, except to a brain dead half deaf audiance.
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
Jack,
...I'm glad we had this talk, now let's go play another 9 holes!
Ole boy... You know we like you, hell you put on a great show. But times are changing guy. They're on to us... they know they're being ripped off, and they're sick and tired of it.
So here's the deal - stop pissing away even more money trying to change their minds. It isn't going to work. All that will happen is those schmuck attorneys will get another Bentley in the driveway...
Just price your stuff fairly, keep the quality at a reasonable level, and forget about wasting money on that useless shit called encryption - one nerd jerking off in his mother's basement is all it takes to make *that* investment completely worthless. And for god's sake, don't even think about suing your customers like those crackheads at the RIAA - that's a bad move, one that irritates them, and forces you to have to get in bed with the only thing worse than lawyers -- Congress.
Save the money that you'll piss away on encryption, and Congressmen, and Lawyers - put it into movies, and cutting the costs on DVD's and they'll come back....
I'll stop eDonkeying and instead I'll pay to download high quality non-crippled licensed copies from the studios. Only thing is, I can't seem to find the link that lets me do that. It must be there, right?
Nah, only kidding. I live in the UK, so because of the need to translate movies in American English into films in British English, I often have to wait weeks or months before I can pay to see them on a big screen or DVD.
Except, of course, I don't, do I? I can just rip them off of teh intarweb. And sometimes with "Academy copy - do not distribute" popups. Clean your own house first, eh?
Yes, we can see the stick, MP[|RI]AA. Now, where's the carrot? You are granted exclusive copy rights so that you publish, not so that you can refrain from publishing. Publish or be damned.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Ext. shot. Old balding movie exec is at a Porche dealership with his blonde trophy bride. They're looking very interested in a nice red late model Porche. A young car salesman comes up to the exec. Salesman: I sorry sir, but your bank called. You're not earning enough. The finance fell through. The trophy bride starts crying. VO: This is the damage that piracy does. Please! Don't let another movie exec go without a porche. Brought to by the luxury car dealers of America
Hmm, Never saw the ads. Guess my commercial skip button on my PVR does work!!!!
This is why I only download .MOVs and .MPG
You know, some bands do this themselves.. And they DO break out of college circuits. Why, the crazy little girls even offer some of their music for free! They must be cray-zee, since the only way to make money is through a middleman. I guess that's why they earn less than an artist signed on a large label. Oh, wait. They earn more . (Per CD sold, since they are their own promotor, record label and publisher). But they must suck, right? It must be ultra commercial music? Well, you can always download it and make up your own mind... At least the critics love them.
This is probably just going to have the opposite effect. A lot of people will go:
Huh? You can download movies on the internet? I want broadband!
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
These people are so clueless. I'm surprised they haven't run these at the theater with the previews before the film.
"To lead the people, you must walk behind them"
The ends never justify the means. Ever. I'm going to take a guess and say you failed moral philosophy. Miserably.
is the way artist seem to agree on all that... the internet is really the best way for an artist to be know, especially the ones that can't get a fair deal from distributing companies. artists can handle their own marketing and distribution... steve coleman does so for his older albums at www.m-base.com, check it
if the sites slashdot links to get slashdoted, how come slashdot itself never gets slashdoted??
I pulled some quotes from the commercial, little text fade ins. here Movies. They're worth it
These people have obviously never seen a Hollywood movie
This is completely ridiculous, this guy is talking about how piracy affects him, but not big "multi-million dollar employees" like producers. But he seems to have left out that these producers make an insane amount of money, as is, and then these companies are making "anti-piracy" ads that cost $$$ to make and to air.
So, while we watched another stupid commercial, some guy like him gets fired, cause they can't pay the producer $xxx million, make commercials for $xx million, pamper stars for another $xxx million, and pay him his damn $12-20 an hour.
Error 407 - No creative sig found
nt
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
One of the Metallica dudes sitting in a golden whirlpool, bottle of JD in one hand, naked groupie next to him and a huge sign saying "I'm poor! - Will rock for food!"
Do you think I'll be able to download any of these commercials using Kazaa, BitTorrent or Limewire??
geek n performer who performs morbid or disgusting acts, as biting off the head of a live chicken
> I'm going to take a guess and say you failed moral philosophy
What a joke. "Moral Philosophy" as a class is absolutely ridiculous, because, despite what a textbook will tell you, different people have different moral sets. To try to teach this in a school is paramount to an attempt at brainwashing.
The ends, in many cases, DO justify the means. Justification is NOT the same as being proven right, it's a good excuse. In this case, in many peoples' opinions (and not necessarily mine, although I recognize that others have this opinion), it is justification.
This train of thought brings me to an interesting point. Why am I even replying to this, the original was a troll, and I'm just feeding him. Maybe because, just like everyone else here, I like to make a point. And I have failed miserably. Good day.
> for any integer base B, (B - a)(B - c) = (B - a - c)B + ac
> (Score:-1, Offtopic)
No shit! Unless I'm confused or giving too much credit for intelligence, THAT'S THE FUCKING POINT! It's SUPPOSED to be offtopic.
While they make millions? ha!
I wish I was starving while making 10 million dollars per movie I feature in.
(I would still be broke, for I don't feature in any movie, but that's just a small detail)
80 CC D8 AF AE D3 AB 54 B7 2E CE 67 C7
"The PSA campaign also will be showcased on www.respectcopyrights.org, a new site to inform Internet users about the moral and legal implications of digital piracy." - This comes from the movie studios who have such a deep understanding of ethics and morality.
Besides, all those people who they will claim are hurt by piracy...how many of them are hourly wage earners or salaried for their work therefore don't see a penny more no matter how "profitable" any particular film is?
Ripped from the Terms and Conditions of respectcopyrights.org:
You should assume that everything you see or read on the Site is copyrighted unless otherwise noted, and may not be used except as provided in these Terms and Conditions without the written permission of Respectcopyrights.org. - Uh-Oh, did I just violate the T&C? Better go hide in my Y2K bunker.
P.S. Will the MPAA not be happy until the word "Site" is replaced with "Internet" in the above T&C statement.
I better see starving artists on these commercials compared to wealthy, famous peeps who just want more millions.
Second, what's with that "unnecessary middleman" stuff? You want someone to be a fullt-time entertainer and fly their own planes, do their own accounting, arrange their own bookings, run their own payroll, act as their own lawyers, write their own contracts, prepare their own taxes, etc.?? Without middlemen, those bands you keep referring to as "artists" would never break out of the college bar circuits
I couldn't agree with you more. I mean I joined the CSAA (College Students Association of America) for exactly that reason. I mean, people want me to be a full-time student and do other stuff. I don't know how many times some unreasonable prick says that I should drive myself to school, and handle my own money, schedule my own classes, make my own budget, act as my own lawyer, even file my own taxes. You want to know the crazy thing, some of these lawless "pirates" even want me to HAVE A JOB
I mean, these thieves are foolish. I am doing my best to be a professional college student, that's a full time job, I can't possibly do all of those other things without sacrificing the quality of my work. And before you ask, YES, these people are pirates and thieves. These pirates use free interns to do some of their work instead of hiring ME for 30,000,000 a job. They're depriving me of my income, they're thieves. I mean, if there's one thing the CSAA has taught me it's that the MPAA is right the only reason I can't make that 30 mil a job is because of lawlessness and pirates.
....
In case you couldn't tell, that was sarcasm, BUT... I AM a college student, and I DO all of the aforementioned things myself. To expect multi-million-dollar-earning movie "stars" to do the same is logical. They've led a rediculously pampered life, most of their problems (drug use/abuse, financial problems) brought on to themselves. And I don't want to hear that "oh, I'm a star, I never have any privacy" bullshit, it comes with the job. You don't hear cops (I'm talkin beat cops here) who literally put their lives on the line every day and face REAL dangers from being recognized when they're not working, complaining about that shit, not to mention prosecutors and judges. Listen, if you give me 30 mil, hell, if you give me 3 mil for 1 year of work; I'll be happy as a pig in shit to wave to the reporters and photographers when I get my mail in my underwear every morning.
The MPAA/RIAA have gouged consumers for years and just like any other creature would, they've adapted to the situation and developed ways of subverting the completely unreasonable prices. EIGHT DOLLARS TO SEE A MOVIE, ONCE? Who are they fooling, if the painter/gaffer is going broke, maybe you can take 1 mil of of Mr. DiCaprio's salary and pay 20 painters and gaffers well for a year.
Open Your Eyes, take a step back from your seat of complacency accepting everything that is as correct, and see the real picture.
Let's get one thing perfectly clear, I did not vote for George W Bush, and I do not endorse what he does or says.
"
The quote is a modification of a Steven Wright comedy routine where he says, "Why is it a penny for your thoughts but you have to put your two cents in, somebody's making a penny"
Let's get one thing perfectly clear, I did not vote for George W Bush, and I do not endorse what he does or says.
"
I've been trying to tag posts that show some sanity with regards to IP. Even here very few want complete abolishment of IP, mostly for the argument you give. Basically conservatism and fear of change. I still say that even an economic justification isn't good enough. The insanity of the whole idea of IP laws is enough that there can be no justification for it.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
What if I dig up some gold? I didn't make it, I found it
So how, before you try to sell the gold, will you know that the gold you have found is not already somebody else's property? Songwriters have this problem.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Says who? In any case, how an artist wants to make money is a matter for that artist, and no one else.
True, however it's up to the market to decide if the artist will actually make money in their various attempts. And the market is increasingly telling the artist that trying to sell music itself is neither optimal nor desireable. (As a sidenote, you can sell high-quality copies of albums without demanding exclusive rights)
Self-serving bunk. People can try to sell whatever they want. Your use of "should" implies a moral judgment at work. Morality has nothing to do with this. As my mother used to say, people in hell want ice water. And you just want free CD's.
Sure, people can try to sell anything. The operative word here is try. Using the word "should" does not imply a moral judgment. I'm being practical and making a suggestion. Now, your assumption that I just want free CD's is a moral judgment. The reality is that I believe it is best for both fans and artists if recorded music is distributed without restrictions. For the fans, because nobody can afford to buy all the music out there. For the artists, because it eliminates the need for contracts, lawyers, and distributors, and largely eliminates the need for promotional spending.
Second, what's with that "unnecessary middleman" stuff? You want someone to be a fullt-time entertainer and fly their own planes, do their own accounting, arrange their own bookings, run their own payroll, act as their own lawyers, write their own contracts, prepare their own taxes, etc.??
Unnecessary middlemen are people who take a cut of the musicians profits without offering much, if anything, in return. First of all, since when is any musician a "full-time" entertainer? Last I checked, most concerts are done at night from something like 7-10pm. What about the rest of the day? Second, artists can hire their own travel agencies, accountants, bookers, advertisers, etc. They don't need a middleman label to do that for them while sucking up all the profits. Ask yourself: when five thousand people paying $35 each attend a concert (that's $175,000), where does all that money go? And that's a single (and modest sized) concert. Now, multiply that by say, 100 concerts per year. If that $17.5 million isn't enough to support and operate a typical band, someone is seriously taking advantage of them.
In general, just one more immature post trying to dress simple greed in bogus moralistic rationalizations.
In general, just one more troll who blindly assumes that everything is fine with current system and can't think for himself how it could be better. And no, it's not greed to want the best for both the musician and the fans.
A creator of a work, be it physical or intellectual, should be granted the exclusive rights to reap the rewards of their labor for a reasonable length of time.
Why?
Also, you feel if i pay a guy to build my house, he should own the house?
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Says who? In any case, how an artist wants to make money is a matter for that artist, and no one else.
And there's the problem, right there. It's not about the money, but the morality of copyrights. How will the artists ever make money without copyrights? Well how will the plantation masters ever make money without slavery? No bullshit, first give up the false premise that you have the right to restrict what people copy in their domain at all, and then work on how to make money from there.
In general, just one more immature post trying to dress simple greed in bogus moralistic rationalizations.
Yes. "I created some music, so I claim a right to coercively restrict you from copying it for my own personal gain" - is a pretty greedy bogus moralistic rationalization.
Nuts.
If I make something, I have complete and exclusive rights to determine how that something is used. If I don't want you to touch it, hold it, or use it, you can't. If I want to make one copy and sell it to you with proviso that your purchase obligates you to make no additional copies, that's my right. If I want to sell some of those rights to a company that makes and sells many copies, with each purchase of a copy binding that buyer to make no additional copies, that's my right, too.
All rights to an authored work originate with, and flow from, the creator of that work. The owner of a legitimate copy of that work has only the rights granted by the author. The owner of an illegitimate copy has no rights at all.
Copyright is perfectly moral, therefore, because it is simply the state's recognition that the creator of a work owns that work and that others hold copies and/or rights in the work only at the volition of the work's creator.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
If I make something, I have complete and exclusive rights to determine how that something is used. If I don't want you to touch it, hold it, or use it, you can't. If I want to make one copy and sell it to you with proviso that your purchase obligates you to make no additional copies, that's my right. If I want to sell some of those rights to a company that makes and sells many copies, with each purchase of a copy binding that buyer to make no additional copies, that's my right, too.
All rights to an authored work originate with, and flow from, the creator of that work. The owner of a legitimate copy of that work has only the rights granted by the author. ...
Thank you, but by time I get ahold of a copy, that is irrelavent. You might have created it, but I have it and I didn't coerce you to get it. I have made no agreements, I have signed no contracts, I have not deprived you of your original copy. It has escaped your domain, and becomes mine to copy freely. My right to copy what is freely at my disposal dominates at that point.
Copyright is perfectly moral, therefore, because it is simply the state's recognition that the creator of a work owns that work and that others hold copies and/or rights in the work only at the volition of the work's creator.
Copyrights are garbage at that point, because at that point it violates my right to copy freely what comes into my domain freely and non coercively. Perhaps the state will try to promise you domain where you have none, perhaps a bum on the street promised I'd pay you million bucks. You would be stupid to believe either one, both of them are promising rights they can't deliver and that don't exist.
If you have a copy of my work, you obtained that copy in one of two ways: 1) Via a channel that I authorized; 2) Via a channel that I did not authorize.
If you got your copy via an unauthorized copy (e.g., from someone who bought one copy and made many duplicates) you have no rights at all to do anything with that copy. The only way for you to get any rights to a copy of my work is to get it via an authorized channel.
You have no right to possess, much less copy, stolen goods.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
If you have a copy of my work, you obtained that copy in one of two ways: 1) Via a channel that I authorized; 2) Via a channel that I did not authorize.
If you got your copy via an unauthorized copy (e.g., from someone who bought one copy and made many duplicates) you have no rights at all to do anything with that copy. The only way for you to get any rights to a copy of my work is to get it via an authorized channel.
That's based off the false premise that you didn't forfiet your rights - say by using an unethical authorization scheme such as copyrights. Which violate my rights because they pre-assume the right to restrict my ability to copy information that I come accross freely, and pre-assume agreements that I never made and then attempt to impose them on me.
Thankfully, another fundamental right is the right to secure my rights. Which for copyrights information technologiles now give me the abillity to do so.
>> That's based off the false premise that you didn't forfiet your rights - say by using an unethical authorization scheme such as copyrights.that copy, not the work itself, and the have only the rights that I, as the work's creator, delegate to them. Typically, this delegation of rights does not include the right to make and distribute unlimited copies.
All this is fundamental common sense. Copyright doctrine only recognizes and codifies these natural conditions.
You, on the other hand, have no right to freely copy whatever happens to come your way. This ignores how you acquire something and the obligations you took onboard when you acquired it.
In fact, you seem to be arguing that you have as much right to anything I make as I do myself. That's complete nonsense, and just a bit sociopathic. So long as you believe that, there's no point in going further.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
"Freely comes my way" - by defenition does not ignore how I acquire something or the obligations I took on board when I acquire it. It is self explanatory, as is the nature of information. Once any escapes your "domain" there is no comprehensive force in the universe that will reign it back. You are declaring rights that can not naturally exist and are never enforcable by their nature. Excuse me, but I find it morally offensive when people go arroud touting rights rights over me that don't and can't exist. They shouldn't be supprised when I challenge.
Codeification is worthless when it does not complement the real world arround it. The law could also declare that gravity pulls upward and would be just as worthless, and people who follow it would be just as destined to failure. I wouln't be happy to see it, but if if someone jumped off a bridge because the law said gravity pulls upward, and called me a sociopath for challenging and refusing to participate - well they would get whats comming to them.
I'm not talking about "information". I'm talking about a physical object, like a book. If I author a book, the only rights you have to possess, copy or otherwise use that book are the rights I give to you.
You appear to stating that the person who creates something has no more right to it than anyone else on the planet. I find that both appalling and ludicrous.
There's a lot of nonsense spouted about "information" that can't be owned or restrained, but that's not the point. You can't go to a bookstore and buy "information". You buy books at bookstores. And books and information are not the same thing.
Your arguments boil down to an assertion of conditions your believe ought to prevail.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
LOL...still excellent you coward.
"We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan