Slashdot Mirror
UK Leads in TV Show Downloading
dirutz writes "Britain has emerged as the world's biggest market for downloading pirated TV, with Australia being the second and the U.S. sitting at third. Among the top pirated TV shows, '24' ranks the first. 'The Simpsons,' 'Enterprise,' 'Stargate SG-1' and 'Battlestar Galactica' are also among the top hitters." 'Pirated' seems a strong word, at least for watching those programs which have been beamed (unencrypted) through my body. Where can I pay a quarter per show for moderate-quality, sanctioned torrent files?
Can I call it????
(sigh)
Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
I second that motion. I would gladly pay a quarter for a tv show download. DRM or not, just let me see it!
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. - Victor Hugo
... that they're now beating out the UK as well!
You're on a roll today!
...Because there's a tax on TV mate!!
http://www.commaecho.com
...that this show is a repeat.
Lousy cheap networks.
You're doing it wrong.
Dupe and a lausy one.
The first posting manifested some of the sence of humour for which Britain used to be famous.
I am saying used to be because if you compare current comedy shows like the "Little Britain" with what used to be like the "Spitting Image" the British Sense of Humour is definitely on its way to extinction.
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
"'Pirated' seems a strong word, at least for watching those programs which have been beamed (unencrypted) through my body."
If they've been "beamed" through your body? Then that means that your VCR has had a chance to "tape" it
Can't I record an episode of the simpson with my vcr?
If yes, can my friends borrow the tape from me? Can I do that
If yes, what if I have 1000 friends? is it still legal?
If yes, can I use bitorrent to share the video??
Why should you be able to download television programs for a quarter?
Why do you use the lack of a pay-service to do so as grounds to bolster the implied claim that downloading these files is not wrong or illegal?
I don't think they will ever sell shows for that cheap because DVD sales are becoming very popular for TV. Why would you pay 30 dollars for season 2 of family guy when you could download the whole season for 5 bucks?
OK, I'm just going to start submitting whatever story I see on the front page. A delay of a couple of hours for a duplicate story seems to be the going rate.
Damn those pesky terrorists
"... avoid simply duplicating what has already been said" Come on editors
Comment removed based on user account deletion
My sarcasm detector must be malfunctioning... damnit, so close.
This is really not suprising because many of these TV shows don't make it over the pond till a few years after their orginal air date. But of course internet discussion is always my the american dates so if people want to see these shows and not wait years, they need to download them.
With easy and cheap bandwidth it is time that we start seeing simultaneous releases of shows. The article is basically saying that people are already taking it into their own hands. If the networks start pushing out the content worldwide at the same time it will reduce this demand.
If you work it out on a captia basis... IE:.. downloading going on per person... Australia appears to be so far out in front its not funny. England has 10 times the people aussie does :|
http://www.sandstorming.com
Do slashdot editors think we're stupid?? It's the 2nd repeat today!!!
"Why do you use the lack of a pay-service to do so as grounds to bolster the implied claim that downloading these files is not wrong or illegal?"
You can tell the downloaders don't have any business sense. Here's a demand and no "small businessman" is trying to meet it. Instead they're all sitting home being effectively leeches. They could be part of the system (legally) and become the middleman. Oh, well. That's why it's suits that are running companies, and geeks just get to sit around and complain about their fate in life.
" ...Because there's a tax on TV mate!!"
Yeah! And you get a wonderful BBC out of it too. Or did you all just say you'd rather go for what's behind door number two?
With the way that the free to air tv stations have been treating all the good programs like Stargate-SG1, 24, and others lately I am totally suprised that Australia is not first.
Stargate-SG1 is my all time favorite show at the momment, and yet we are a whole season behind. So this week Seven have decided to show the first 6 eps of season 8 within 8 days, and they have not shown any hint of playing Stargate Atlantis.
They move around the screening times, and we are starting to get into footy season, so there is no hope of it being in a regular time slot before 10:30 at night.
I hate the fta stations as anything desent gets rubbished and the creators of the shows don't really care that the licencees are just stuffing around with their creations.
Well ten is about to start show battle star galactica, and and I am only guesing that it will not be long before start stuffing around with it's airing times.
We must beat other countries in everything! Pick up the pace!
It comes out there First. Not a big mystery. If Asscrack, Nowhere had the show playing- guess where the show would come from?
It's TV's problem for not distributing over the internet. Problem solved now- and too late for them.
"With easy and cheap bandwidth..."
Obviously granted by the "cheap and easy" bandwidth fairy. Seriously people just because some of you have something. Doesn't mean the rest of the planet does. Do at least TRY to keep that in mind, before you pornificate.
We get series weeks and weeks after they first air in the US, and then only on sky TV. Downloading the shows from torrents is the only way you can see them while they're still a current topic of conversation. Also, the UK get gouged on DVD prices (just like everying else!), hey DVD makers, £1!=$1 damn you!
MacBook Pro. Worst name since the Bicycle
it's not whether you'd honestly pay a quarter of a US dollar for a shitty show, it's whether you have the voice to say, haha, I'm not payin', I'm getting this show the easiest way possible, whether it costs me a quarter, or whether I get it for that same quarter and you charge me. Competition is the name of the game. love it or leave it.
This is a dupe, but I'll put in my thoughts anyway:
Most of the television torrents I've seen have been free of advertisements. I know those ads are obnoxious, but they're the bread and butter of whatever network you (the show ripper) took that show from. The least you can do is leave them in the file and let the downloader decide what to do with them.
End of thought. Back to my regularly scheduled dupe righteous indignation.
"But of course internet discussion is always my the american dates so if people want to see these shows and not wait years, they need to download them."
Uh, huh. Is this the best excuse people could come up with? How about if you don't see the latest episode of a famous American Medical Drama; then you'll never save that relative with the nearly incurable disease?
If all those brits would have paid for Trek instead of pirated it, then it might not be scheduled for cancellation. Bottom o' th' morning to ya.
Table-ized A.I.
Not only a dupe but trails fark.com... again. WOnder if submitter is cross posting?
Too lazy to create a sig...
It's true!
I read it on another site... Except THEY ONLY POSTED THIS FACT ONCE!
"Where can I pay a quarter per show for moderate-quality, sanctioned torrent files?"
Word.
I mean WTF MPAA (or whoever is whinging about this)? Hell, you can even leave the ads in the stream if you want.
"I second that motion. I would gladly pay a quarter for a tv show download. DRM or not, just let me see it!"
Help!! Oh, help!! How many quarters will go into a million dollar TV episode?* Is there really that many people on the planet who like Law and Order?
*Help!! Oh, help, again!! Just what is this capi-tal-ism that everyones talking about?
and Slashdot leads the world in dupe posting.
from the they-Duped-it-through-me dept.
dirutz writes "Slashdot has emerged as the world's biggest market for Dupeing Storys with Mirrordot being the second and the coral cach. sitting at third. Among the top duped storys, Uk pirates' ranks the first. Linux TCO,' 'Windows security holes,and 'EFF endangerd Gadjets ' are also among the top hitters." 'Dupe' seems a strong word, at least for watching those Storys which have been beamed (unedited and unchecked) through my Slashdots editors. Where can I pay a quarter per Dupe for moderate-quality, sanctioned Dupe storys
'Pirated' seems a strong word, at least for watching those programs which have been beamed (unencrypted) through my body.
No, 'pirated' doesn't refer to recording them, it refers to posting them on the Internet for anybody to download. I would think the difference was obvious.
The standard meaning of the word is "distributing copyrighted material without permission" (for instance, here). Regardless of your position on this issue, you have to agree that the definition applies here.
And yes, it's a strong word. It's a newspaper headline. What do you expect?
Java: the bastard demon spawn of C++ and Ada
why would UKers be downloading Battlestar Galactica? it airs for them 3 months before us..
-- Note: These Comments are Generated by ME! Not You! ME!
Surely it's a joke, an early April fools. Repeat story after repeat story...they are having a laugh!?
Right ???
Somebody remind me of that in a day or so.
I see no sense in waiting for the shows to come over here. I download them and keep them for a season and them delete them. I use to stock pile them and serve them to anybody else, but its risky stuff now what with the lawsuits.
I see a future where the networks will have to come together and release these shows at the same time around the world. One because there will be less rips and second. Cinema, DVD and Music is normally released worldwide these days as well anyway.
This also helps my schedule since I don't have time to a program at the same time each week (kinda hard anyway since I have no TV), I'd rather download it and watch it at my leisure. The power of the internet at work.
Jonathanjk.com
"1. The networks won't allow a middleman. Where have you been for the last 10 years?"
Have YOU asked them? Have you even tried?
"2. The geeks are getting exactly what they want. The networks aren't. Guess being a suite isn't so great, eh?"
Funny thing is, the Europeans who first settled America had a similiar mentality when it came to the New World.
Oh yes. As long as you're getting what you want. The well can never run dry.
Microsoft's parent's primer to computer slang
Slashdot is the world's biggest market for duplicate stories.
If networks posted their shows, with the ads intact and maybe a few extra, I'd download it in a heartbeat. It'd sure beat the hell out of finding a torrent (especcially with the sudden lack of good torrent directories). Sure, I can fast forward through commercials, but I could do that if I used TiVo or if I recorded it.
When I make a Tampon Run to the store, for the wife, I usually recall that Playtex works best for soaking up the Blue Liquid.
"This also helps my schedule since I don't have time to a program at the same time each week (kinda hard anyway since I have no TV), I'd rather download it and watch it at my leisure. The power of the internet at work."
Well I guess that explains Tivo's "failed business model" then.
Recent studies shows that more then 500 000 Swedes download at least 1 TV show each week.. I wonder how only 100 000 ppl download the new 24 every week?
"Do slashdot editors think we're stupid?? It's the 2nd repeat today!!!"
We keep coming back. Does that answer your question?
what could be interesting is the rise of a legal napsteresque service for TV shows. I guess it will be coming as fatter pipes arrive, but why can't we have a method of paying say $30-$50/month to watch unlimited amounts of shows on demand. Hell the networks could even throw commercials in there. You could have the ability to stop and rewind but the server could refuse to let you fastforward the commercials. This could work great. Go get popcorn in the commercial, come back 10 seconds too late and rewind. Sure its not as good as the free stuff on torrents, but its the only option that would keep shows being made. It would outdate cable instantaneously and be highly convenient to those of us who want to watch tv whenver we want and what we want.
Sure we'll never get rid of cable/broadcast tv completely as theirs local news, and other realtime stuff, but for entertainment purposes such a system would be amazing.
Phil
Thanks for posting that, I needed a good laugh. At least someone is posting some fun stories here.
That is hilarious. Obviously M$ have completely lost the plot and don't know what the fuck are doing anymore. It's quite sad. Breathtaking in it's sickening stupidity and toe-curdling in showing M$ as trying to be 'down' with the script kiddies; it is a true classic. I'm saving that web page for all eternity.
Now whoever decided to put that out at M$ should surely be facing the sack for making the company look even more ridiculous than it already is.
Maybe we could make a movement where we write and film our own shows and license them such that everyone is free to modify and redistribute them. It's not like DV cameras cost a lot of money (no more than a computer) and everyone has video editing software these days, and our desktop machines are good enough to do tv quality CG (movie quality if we use distributed networks). Where's the Free (as in freedom) Tv?
How we know is more important than what we know.
That's two dupes in forty-eight hours! It's not April 1st yet, is it?
We as TV watchers want shows. We hate ads, but are willing to put up with them in order to get the "free gimmick", the show.
The shows are created merely as a side effect of advertising; the goal of the television industry is *NOT* to create quality programming for you. The goal is to sell advertising to corporations. What you as a TV watcher want is *completely* irrelevant.
At least in the US, without advertising, there would be no tv shows. Period. The show is just there to entice you into watching the advertising.
There is no real *money* to be made from the shows themselves directly; they are merely a means to an end for generating vastly more significant ad dollars.
As such, you can't tell *great* stories on TV like you can in books because you are beholden to the customer (corporate advertisers) to produce bland inoffensive content that leaves the consumer with a vaguely positive feeling after watching it.
If you controlled your copy of the show, you would not be generating new ad dollars every time you watched it, which is the business model these things operate on. You would also be less likely to watch it (and the ads) "just because it's on", further detracting from the ad revenue. DVD's of shows are a new concept, and they only come out after the up front ad dollars have been sucked out of the system.
While there may be a quite a few people who would like to own a copy of a tv show for their collection, there is no way the sales for copies can compare to the royalties and advertising revenue from broadcasters.
Even if the producers of shows *could* cut out the middlemen and offer their content as a free download with inserted advertising, they would be foolish to move to that model because they would only get paid for the show *once* (from the ads). With broadcasters, they generally get paid royalties each time the episode airs, and it is up to the broadcaster to make a profit on the ads.
One wonders why people are willing to both pay for cable/satellite TV service *and* deal with advertising. The advertising revenue should more than pay for the service; paying service fees on top of the inconvenience of be advertised to is outrageous.
Food for thought...
Then if you want the DVD quality later with the extras, you wouldn't mind so much...
I'm convinced the networks have been brainwashed into the mindset of the only source of revenue being from the advertisers... and lack the ability now to see outside the box...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Aint this the most out of topic photo taken EVER?
5 5.stm
:)
what one you say?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/42762
the picture a bit down, with the guy at the comp.. well he is playing HOMEWORLD (2?)..
mohaha..
damn me and my geekish experiences..
anyway, just wanted to say that anyway, first post.
Why, when for a change we got Battlestar Galactica before the yanks. That was unusual to say the least and quite refreshing. I do however wonder why it is our country is so keen to be in a close relationship with the States and yet is happy to accept the last season hand me downs of tv shows and films.
.
I can imaging that TV piracy would be reduced if we felt that it would be possible to watch the same seasons of Westwing, Battlestar, Rescue Me, Las Vegas, Gilmore Girls etc etc as the states tends to
It seems wierd that my email and files can be sent through the net a within moments of me hitting the enter key but the Execs at Fat Cat studios still seem to send all the episodes by row boat across the atlantic !
And thats why Firecrackers and kittens don't mix.
Okay, we all are aware that this story is a dup of a previous one, well everyone except the individual that allowed this story to make it to the slashdot front page again, so I would like to take a moment to change the topic and voice my gripe about cable television and the utter stupidity of the entire situation in general.
Why is it that the public at large is expected to foot the bill for cable television for the luxury of watching programming that includes commercials? Television networks as well as your cable company make tons of money on the advertising that goes into television programs. The only reason the networks are able to charge as much as they do for the commercials is because people watch the programming.
It seems to me that if someone pays to receive television channels (many of which can be received for free over the air) via cable or satellite they should be able to receive programming that does not include commercials at all. For example if I can watch FOX using an antenna for free what value am I getting by paying to get that identical programming with commercials over a cable line? Compare it to viewing content on a website for free with ads or opting to buy a subscription to view the content without ads, much like you can on slashdot. Now channels like HBO that do not include commercials I can see paying for because they are offering me original commercial free content, something I can not get otherwise.
There is certainly a market for commercial free programming as can be shown by the popularity of subscription based DVRs such as Tivo. Sure people like watching their favorite programs at their convenience, but really a large part of it is being able to do so without the commercials.
To put it simply, I am of the opinion that basic cable should be provided to everyone without cost because the ad content has already generated more than enough revenue to cover the cost of distribution. The cable companies also generate ad review by selling local commercial spots into the programming. The cable companies should be able to pass on their costs to the networks rather than the general public because the networks could not possibly charge the advertisers as much as they do without the viewers the cable companies provide.
Offering at least basic cable for free would greatly increase the potential number of viewers which would in turn allow the networks and cable companies to charge more for their advertisement spots. Compare it to the way that print ads are sold where the cost is based on total distribution; higher distribution equals higher revenue per ad sold. Television viewership is down greatly and I would suspect that this trend will continue unless something new and innovative is given a chance.
Another thing I would really like to see happen would be for the cable companies to allow you to pick the programming you would like to receive. There are only 10 to 20 channels at most I would be interested in watching if I did have cable. Perhaps I could warm up a little to paying a nominal amount, say less than $20 per month including all taxes, if I were able to hand pick which channels I could receive and at least a fair number of those would have to be commercial free (such as HBO).
-- Just my $0.02 worth...
This just in. Timothy is leading in Slashdot duplication.
Comparably, "O" -that is, Oprah's magezine, the top subscription magezine (Not top selling, thank god, but it is delivered to more homes than any other delivery) makes almost twenty times in ad space than it does from the cover price.
I don't know what the cover price, but if it's three dollars, (Although she may have brainwashed her viewers into three times that by now) you're looking at a cost of sixty dollars cover price without advertising.
These women are spending FAR MORE than that difference, based on the ads they are seeing, I assure you.
Now think about how much basic cable would cost, for you, who does not watch Oprah, if she were to stop having commmercial breaks during her program. Assuming you have cable, try multiplying by two or three HUNDRED.
Television is evil. I cancelled my cable when the Cartoon Network changed it's lineup, but should have done so earlier.
When Television was a new invention, the public was promised public education, and various performances, like Ballet, Broadway shows, and OPERA. Oprah is evil.
Don't you mean.. BIZZARO!
A sarcasm detector, that's a real useful invention.
Slashdot seems hell bent on loosing me as a reader... this dupe nonsence is really out of control.
This isn't going to happen soon because the networks do not own most of the stations that broadcast their shows, and the individual stations would view such downloads as competition. Stations make their money on advertising revenue, and the rates they receive are based on the number of viewers watching that station. (Based on such ratings tools as Nielsen and local population figures.) Every viewer who chooses to buy a downloadable version of the show directly from the network instead of watching it on the local station is one fewer viewer in the station's audience figures for their advertising revenue. Why, therefore, should the station remain on that network when the network is directly competing with them for revenue?
I worked for an advertising agency that was doing a web site for a major product manufacturing company. The company wanted to be able to sell its own products on its web site, but its dealer network threatened firmly that if the manufacturer did this, they'd stop carrying the manufacturer's products.
I'm sure if a network decided to sell downloads of its shows, its stations would threaten to drop them in favor of a competing network.
hi
can i repeat myself?
can i repeat myself?
i m enjoying my$rbtl
i m enjoying my$rbtl
_ In Egypt Networks: Network Solutions with a Twist
That's untrue, though. Have you ever seen how much merchandise there is for - for example - Spongebob Squarepants? It's an insane amount really, so don't tell us that the shows itself are entirely irrelevant and that the only money comes from advertising. It may be true for some shows, maybe even many (but that's hard to determine), but it certainly isn't for all of them.
Oh yeah, and don't forget shows that are made into movies - that's another source of income not related to advertising. Again, Spongebob is a good example...
quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
..so i'll say again, its not 'piracy', that's when you COPY someone's product and SELL it cheaper but at a higher profit to you. Technically this is IP 'theft' for the sharers and potential sale circumvention for the views. But really who cares.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
How about making comments down here with the rest of us, where we can reply to them properly and even moderate them?
For that matter, how about checking for dupes before posting a story?
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Well if it's piracy to time shift some TV output so I can watch it when I want without adverts then my VCR unit has been doing a Captain Pugwash impression ever since I first bought it !
I've been taping stuff for years to watch later on so what's the difference now that I'm getting the stuff via P2P ? I'm still not watching the adverts (sorry advertisers you can all fuck off back up your own rectums) so the only difference is I'm not no longer even slightly constrained by the TV suppliers schedules.
But wait a minute... What's going on here. Now that I've properly looked at them it appears that both my VCR and my cassette tape deck have both hoisted a small Jolly Roger ! So maybe we are off to the high seas after all...
Repeat after me:
1 Copyright infringement is not piracy.
2 Piracy involves stealing by force, figues of eight, scurvy swabs, parrots and grog
3 Copying something does not deprive anyone of their copy of a work.
So all together now (in a Rage against the Machine stylee) "Fuck the *AA I won't do what you tell me".
Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
Here in New Zealand it is not uncommon to wait for several years to see some shows (if they show at all, of course).
We're still waiting for the last three seasons of Farscape and the last four seasons of Enterprise.
There are some shows that I've only heard about recently that played about 5 years back in the States and elsewhere - and I have no hope of them showing here.
(We just started getting Firefly a month or so back.)
Dammit ! That should have read:
"Fuck the *AA I won't watch what you tell me"
That'll learn me to use the preview button...
Sky subscribers are morons. They pay to be advertised at !
This is getting to be worse than broadcast TV with all these reruns!
Im gonna take some comment rated +5, Insightful the last time this story was posted. After all, I can do with some good comment ratings
I'm much more funny, interesting and insightful than the moderators think
Second, I just think I figured out a way for the networks to make money off of downloaded shows aside from charging for the download.
The real problem arises when people edit out commercials and having the ability to skip through them, which the networks hate.
What if there were small ads at the bottom of the screen? You know, like the kind that pop up to let you know what show is on next? I realize some might find this intrusive, but if they're only on for say...10 seconds, and there aren't that many during the whole show, I think that would be a fair tradeoff (if the download were free of course).
On season 2 episode 9 of Arrested Development which I just downlaoded, there was a popup for the Simpsons after the show, and I know that it caught my eye.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
Timothy dupes (for the second time today) an article that has *already* been on Slashdot the same day(or at least within a 24 hour period!)
I'm drunk and can recognize a dupe when I see it... What's Timothy's excuse?? Too many 'shrooms??? (Not too mention I can still manage some very basic HTML formatting!)
Web hosting that doesn't suck!Dreamhost
As someone else who was very intrigued by Battlestar Galactica, I resorted to BitTorrent to download the mini - which didn't air in Sydney until _last_ week (over a year after airing in the US), and got even more excited waiting for the series. (I've seen the whole season, and it's well worthwhile.)
All I can say is that the television networks have well and truly lost control over their choke-hold on distribution. Air a program _anywhere_ in the world and it's instantaneously available _everywhere_ in the world. Which means either a) all showings of all series will take place on the same date all around the world; or b) piracy is going to drive the television business out of business, broadcast flag or no. (In Australia we don't have broadcast flags. Yet. Nor do they have them in the UK.)
The economic pressure of filesharing broadcast TV is going to force the national networks to coordinate their offerings across the world - mark my words...
MGM and BayTSP are handing out D.M.C.A. notices to people sharing episodes through BitTorrent. My service was terminated from this in December 2004. You can see an example of its letter here. Are foreign countries, like U.K. getting these copyright infringement letters too?
Per Capita! we love that down here! we use it for everything to say we are number 1!!!
proud aussie i am now!!!
Asscrack, Nowhere
you miss-pelt Buttfuck, Manitoba.
Original here /. editors wake up in the morning, they read this guy's RSS feed, and write about any interesting stories, unaware that they may have given him the news in the first place.
I think we are seeing recursive RSS blogging.
I have a theory that someone who reads Slashdot is running a website/blog in another timezone. During the American night, he writes articles on many stories, some of which come from Slashdot. When the
This would explain the regular pattern of stories that pop up again the next day. News that comes back after two days may be explained by American sites, which don't write articles in the night but instead during the following day.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
Duped story is not the word I would use in this case... I'd say it's a rerun.
:-/
Seriously Taco, if duped stories are this common, why is it that redundant posts give you bad Karma? I sn't this a 'Do as I say, not as I do'?
before the dupes start appearing on the front page together. I'm just waiting.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens.
And 2nd place aint even close!
eat shiat and bark at the moon
Sometimes we get cut down version of the shows, even on DVDs. The "Friends" DVDs sold in the UK are not uncut, are terrible quality and somehow have telecine artifacts (not visible on TVs for obvious reasons). I know that is just one, dead sitcom but this is just an example.
Here is a question from people outside USA and want to download a show:
:-P Or for the price of free life time access to this service.
What if I have remote access to a computer/PVR which can record shows in USA. And I personally click a button to record a copy of the show and then download it off to my australia computer for time-shifting viewing which is legal?
It is a little bit stretch here... what if a USA company set up a remote recording service and allow users to set up their own timers to record a show and have it ready for download.
Maybe the users who have legally recorded the same show can even use BT to quickly download since they have basically the rights to the exact same recordings.
I want to patent this idea.
Information Efficiency
Just goes to show how bad the programming in Australia is (I cant speak for .uk).
If the programming guys took note of *what* we were downloading....
The shows are created merely as a side effect of advertising; the goal of the television industry is *NOT* to create quality programming for you. The goal is to sell advertising to corporations. What you as a TV watcher want is *completely* irrelevant.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/
Battlestar Galactica was apparently aired on sky (in the uk) as the entire seasons episodes is locatable it (*unusually*) aired over the pond first
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
I do apologise, I mistook your post as a reply to the person that was saying there are ten times as many people in the UK as in Australia. Please accept this humble retraction of my accusation of wrongness.
Slashdot Leads in Story Duplicating!
Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
Stargate SG-1 is currently ahead of the US networks on Sky One - so, it makes more sense for you guys to be downloading from us.
However, I've been downloading it because I don't have Sky in my University accomodation. My parents have it, so morally I see no difference between downloading it and having them post it me on a tape.
PocketGamer.org - For the gamer on the go!
Considering how badly modern television in the U.S. sucks (Reality TV? Who fucking cares? At least the brits do theirs more like docos) compared to the U.K., it's surprising that we don't download as much. Back when sites like BuckTV.net used to be up, I found myself downloading programs mostly from the U.K. or older U.S. shows that aren't yet available on DVD. I was able to see the excellent series "The Worst Week of My Life" just a week behind british viewers thanks to BuckTV and eDonkey. The series finaally premiered here on BBC America six months later and with commercials. There has to be someone out there who will address the needs of those of us who want high quality programming (movies and TV series) without commercials, on demand, and from around the world. As far as I can tell, this was the closest thing going...
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Why is it that the public at large is expected to foot the bill for cable television for the luxury of watching programming that includes commercials? Television networks as well as your cable company make tons of money on the advertising that goes into television programs.
Because cable companies DON'T get advertising revenue from the channels they carry. In general cable companies have to pay the content sources for the programming they carry. Some basic channels are free, but most are not.
Seriously, why do you have to buy (for instance) Star Trek TOS? Isn't the copyright long expired? Oh that's right, copyright law has been perverted to solely benfit corperations and not society as it was intended to.
I guess my respect for copyright went down in the same drain as the original intent of the law.
And when some <sarcasm>1337 h4x0rs</sarcasm> can rig better distribution than big corporations, with next to no expenses, I guess it's just another sign of what we have known for some time: media distribution companies belongs in the same part of the historybooks as the steam engine.
At least I dont want law to codify a technological standstill. Which from my point of view seems increasingly to be the case.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
Excuse me, but I pay my cable bill. I'd like to be able to see some of these shows whenever I want, but don't feel like spending the time/money to encode them. If somebody else did and can share that with me, great! Heck, the simpsons is even still on 'free' air. How can they claim this as piracy? Nobody is trying to sell the stuff for profit (oh yeah, the networks want to overcharge you for the DVDs several years later. I forgot)
Which is legal, no matter what you losers around here think.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
The fact that some people would pay $5 and not $30 does not guarantee the studio will make more or less money by offering downloads. The studios are facing the monopolists price discrimination problem. They know there is a segment of the market that is willing to pay $30 and a much larger segment willing to pay less. If everyone is lumped together, i.e. they can't price discriminate, then the best price to charge is the price where the added customers due to the new price yield as much profit as is lost by dropping everyone else's price who would have bought anyway. The whole picture changes when you can somehow segment the market. Imaginge there was a large group of tech saavy buyers who would pay $5 but not $30, and a large group of people who are willing to pay $30, but are not tech saavy, and a small group who are willing to pay $30, but will only pay $5 if that option is available. The monopolist (the studio) can offer $30 and $5. The only revenue lost is on the group willing to pay $30 but now noly pay $5, and the gain is on all the additional customers at $5 that would not have purchased before. So, depending on the number of people that give up paying $30 to pay $5, this could make or cost the studio money. What complicates the situation is there really would be three options. $30, $5 and $0. The only difference between $5 and $0 is the good feeling you get from being legal and paying $5. Now the studio has to balance revenue lost on tech saavy people willing to pay $30 against revenue gained from people willing to choose $5 over $0. How likely is that to be profitable for the studio? It is my prediction that as long as option $0 is around, there will be no option $5. PLus, if tech saavy becomes everyone, how many people will choose option $30, or even option $0 at an infelxible time with commercials. When that happends, the studio as we know it will no longer exist. I wonder what kind of production studios would?
They've already recouped their production costs in broadcast advertising. If you think their manufacturing and distribution costs are $22 per box, you're truly clueless.
And boy, I'm resentful with they charge almost as much for Buffy Season 1 (12 eps) as they do with following seasons. That, and no DVD of Cupid (1997) box set.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
What I find really odd is the top downloaded shows in the UK are actually OUT in the UK. They are actually 2-3 months ahead of the US in episodes that are being aired currently. Stargate SG-1 & Atlantis only have 1 episode to go in this season, 24 in on episode 9 of this season, and Battlestar Galactica has been finished with this season for a LONG time.
While this is an entertaining discussion of IP and elite Intarweb usage patterns of the American and European wired societies, the discussion seems to have ignored Asian usage. In Korea, viewers regularly download tv programs from the broadcaster's site to their handheld devices. This trend can only accellerate in China, and throughout the rest of Asia. This model ignores a lot of IP issues and cuts to getting eyes o the screen. We could all take a lesson here and just get on with it. "When all is said and done, a lot more is said than done!"
*sigh*
I see that we have a lot of business majors posting about how things should be. I also see it being demonstrated that while everyone has ideas, apparently the majority lack the will, and knowledge to translate that into a fully realized implimentation. Have any of you EVER started and ran a business in your entire lives? How about a business based on "content"? Do you wonder then why very few listen to you then?
I wonder what slashdot will be like on April 1st this year.
Will these dups get so bad as to the point that if they run nothing but dups that day, no one will notice the diffrence?
Or is the joke going to be slashdot not having any dups at all that day?
What about Canada's downloads? Tons of people are on the popular download sites for episodes from Canada...don't we at least get a say?
Well, with Comcast (AT&T cable) "On Demand" (you can watch whatever show whenever you want) downloading will become a thing of the past for those who don't like having physical copies of shows. I am the type that loves to have backups of things I like, but if I had comcast, i'd use on demand most the time.
They need to say f!ck the pirates and understand that their content is going to be copied even if they don't offer tv downloads. But, I am sure there are a ton of people out there that would pay the dollar or whatever to download a mpeg4 copy of the episode, giving the company a profit for something that might not have been paid for at all. If they use the streaming idea people are just going to ignore their misguided attempt at raping the consumer once again.
This is a truly interesting and insightful post. But I'm guessing that, for them to bite - the big production houses would need to know that they could make more money using this model than the current broadcast > DVD > Syndication one. That definitely seems plausible, but it seems like it would still require the establishment of some sort of "network" to really get the word out worldwide.
Dissolve... Resolve... Evolve...
So, people want to download stuff that was already available on TV ? Perhaps, if the price wass right, they would pay for it ?
Imagine if, for a quid ($1.80), you could download any programme you missed because you were down the pub when it was broadcast. Nowadays this could be deducted by SMS (in the UK at least) - who would think twice ?
Think about it TV people - a whole new market.
The more together punters would simply video the programme by setting the timer before they go to work. In the real world most people would be too hungover to sort this out before they run out to go to work. The same people wouldn't think twice about texting themselves a quid debt in order to download a digital version of the programme they missed. Certainly easier that finding a torrent the next day...speaking from personal experience that is.
From an Australian perspective, commercial television sucks major arse. SciFi fans get shafted the hardest. They don't keep to their programmed schedule, constantly shuffle SciFi episodes around in their timetable and show episodes out of order. To add insult to injury Australian commercial TV show crap copies of successful "reality" tv gameshows. Popstars vs Australian Idol? Makes me spew. Australian commerical TV brought in on themselves. Nowadays, torrent is my TV and good riddance to crappy channels 7,9 and 10.
Every time I see someone whining about having to pay for something that "should be free", I can't help but think how hypocritical that is.
Let's see. A box set of an entire season of a less popular show costs about $35. Last I saw, the X-Files were still going for $95 on the shelf. Did it cost less to manufacture the discs in Sanford and Son? I doubt it. It's called supply and demand.
When YOU people see the bright shiny LOtR box sets in the store and snap them up, the industry says "AHA! See? We can charge $25 a movie if we throw in lots of fluff!" So, instead of lowering the prices down to $5/movie, they just release new "Super Mondo Edition" versions with a shinier package and an extra disc of someone blathering on about how cool it is that they got paid for it, and sell it to you AGAIN for another $20.
Yes, it shouldn't be illegal for me to download something that got sent to my house anyways. But, it also shouldn't be illegal for me to scan in and OCR an entire novel from the library, or to copy that new fighting game from the rental store. As long as I'm not trying to re-sell things, it should't be illegal. But it is. Because WE all keep buying things and helping the people in charge stay in charge. As long as they are, they'll decide what's right and wrong, and we'll continue to bitch about it and give them our money anyways.
This is the most ridiculous claim of piracy yet. I'm in the 'fuck you, you send it out for free, we'll do what we want with it' crowd.
http://www.hindu.com/2005/02/20/stories/2005022001 762000.htm
No doubt anyone who either lives here in Australia or who has visited will vouch for the fact that our television is terrible. Old American soapies, telemovies that never even made it to video! Add into the mix 5 adverts every 6 minutes and you have the Murdoch / Packer version of entertainment. No doubt downloads of decent TV from the UK, Canada and US are a saviour. God bless bit torrent (-;
I downloaded the brit BSG episodes because they are IHMO better. There is content in the brit version that isn't in the yank version. Also the into music is different for some odd reason. The brit version is ethereal and very cool. The yank version sounds like a funeral march. I watched all the episodes from the brits and only a couple from the yanks. Makes you wonder what else is missing.
Speak truth to power.
Micropayments to publishers are the last gasp of the middlemen. I want my twenty-five cents to go toward production, not publishing and promotion.
What I want to know is, where can I pay to finance the production, and release under a free license, of the sort of stuff I want to see?
The reason I download TV episodes from BT/etc is because the series being shown in the UK are 6 months behind those in the US etc. To take one example, when "The O.C." was in its second season in the US, we in the UK had only just started episode 15 (out of 27).
If I want DVD quality I buy the box set, but when I have to wait months to see the same episodes as those in other parts of the world, I move to BT.
I am reading more and more about independent TV series being produced for the internet distribution. The question is...would i pay for such content? Well since I get satellite TV and I'm in the US, I might be willing to pay for some original programming that is NOT available on regular TV. How much would I pay? Well it seems the typical video online has a quick ad on the beginning of a video clip and possibly one at the end, so it is relatively commercial free. I think anywhere from $.99 - $1.99 would be reasonable. Imagine if MIAMI VICE was created for online distribution only.... I would pay to see a show like that. Any thoughts?