MegaUpload Has Been Taken Offline

Forums › Off topic › MegaUpload Has Been Taken Offline

1 | ... | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40

450 posts

Ultimate Geek

#585708 23-Feb-2012 13:52

The thing is I wouldn't have watched it otherwise & had no interest to..

Prime example was the train wreck Cowboys & Aliens, my life would have been better if I hadn't wasted 2 hours of my life watching it. But it was on a hard drive, missus wanted me to stop playing video games, so we watched it.

Didn't want to, regret seeing it, & would have never paid a solitary cent to see it..

Different league to say the pre release pirating of Siones Wedding, which directly impacted the industry & reduced movie attendances..

nzlemming

79 posts

Master Geek

#585851 23-Feb-2012 17:53

MikeyPI:
Different league to say the pre release pirating of Siones Wedding, which directly impacted the industry & reduced movie attendances..

Or so it is regularly alleged. Personally, I thought Sione's Wedding sucked goat's balls and THAT was the reason it didn't do well. Plus the pirating had nothing to do with the net and physical copies are harder to distribute than downloads. Also, the copy stolen (and that is the right word in this case) was incomplete as is was still in production. Check out Juha Saarinen's blog post on it An industry plundered by pirates

Brendan

716 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#586028 24-Feb-2012 00:19

Kyanar:
For you to claim that "I wouldn't pay for it anyway" is just an attempt to deflect attention away from the fact that you're actually lying, because you did want to watch it and therefore were it not available for free you would have paid to do so or not watched it.

This is an emotional response to an debate you clearly do not understand.

They disagree with you - so they do not have a valid point? They are "lying".

Why should you be allowed to have your cake and eat it too? Especially when if a corporation tries it, there's a massive outcry about how evil they are. I see a lot of this one sided logic from the pro-piracy fanatics.

Corporations are evil. By definition, they fit the criteria of psychopathology.

I do not think you would understand that either, so I will not go off topic to explain it. I suspect I would waste my time.

Simply put, I am attempting to get you to re-evaluate your attitude in this debate. I think you can do better than tantrums and ad-hominem attacks.

marmel

1924 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#586065 24-Feb-2012 08:23

Brendan:
Kyanar:
For you to claim that "I wouldn't pay for it anyway" is just an attempt to deflect attention away from the fact that you're actually lying, because you did want to watch it and therefore were it not available for free you would have paid to do so or not watched it.

This is an emotional response to an debate you clearly do not understand.

They disagree with you - so they do not have a valid point? They are "lying".

Why should you be allowed to have your cake and eat it too? Especially when if a corporation tries it, there's a massive outcry about how evil they are. I see a lot of this one sided logic from the pro-piracy fanatics.

Corporations are evil. By definition, they fit the criteria of psychopathology.

I do not think you would understand that either, so I will not go off topic to explain it. I suspect I would waste my time.

Simply put, I am attempting to get you to re-evaluate your attitude in this debate. I think you can do better than tantrums and ad-hominem attacks.

I think you need to read through your own posts before you start to accuse people of having tantrums.

You often talk down to anyone that doesn't agree with your opinion, question their occupation, and give the impression you think you are "above" even debating this topic, see your comment above:

"I do not think you would understand that either, so I will not go off topic to explain it. I suspect I would waste my time."

No doubt you will have another response for myself but first I ask that you please take some of your own advice.

Instead of getting personal against other members how about sticking to the topic.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79268 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#586066 24-Feb-2012 08:24

Either stick to the topic or I lock it. Everyone behave or is gonna be a banhammer distribution without warning.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#586080 24-Feb-2012 08:42

I saw a clip last night on TV with Kim Dotcoms San Francisco lawyer.

The argument is that Dotcom has done nothing wrong, he operates a cloud service, and that he tells users not to put illegal stuff on there. That is, there is no secondary infringement law in effect in the US

Then, if he is done by the law this will affect the internet substantially, an example was a Google search for Madonna or Brittany Spears may bring up images, which may be copyright and therefore an infringement.

Interesting comments.

old3eyes

9119 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#586124 24-Feb-2012 09:56

Here's an interesting take on the state of the US justice system I came across today.

http://apostasy.no/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/DotCom-MEGAUPLOAD-Sentece.jpg

Regards,

Old3eyes

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

MikeyPI

450 posts

Ultimate Geek

#586639 25-Feb-2012 13:21

& now the FBI have requested the New Zealand government appeal the bail...

Can they just stay out of our judicial business?

sen8or

1789 posts

Uber Geek

#586866 26-Feb-2012 09:39

so if distribution of creative material was free for all, who would pay for its production and what would the incentives be to produce it in the first place (other than "for the good of the people")?

Advertising?

Yep, I can sure bet that people would love seeing 10mins of adds at the beginning and/or through the production. There is enough outcry now about non skippable trailers and the anti-piracy spot that inconveniences peoples lives by a whole 40 seconds, ohh the humanity

If you want a bit of a laugh, check our Morgan Spurlocks "The Greatest Movie Ever Sold" which explores product placement to the extreme (I'm sure somewhere will have a copy you can d/load if you are so anti-establishment not to shell out a few bucks to hire it).

Voluntary donations?

Interesting theory, one which I think as business has tried before (no price list displayed) I think it was a deli/restaurant if I remember correctly, but no idea on its success.

Barter?

Mix of free or paid for? IE you can get it from the net for free from abc.com or you can go to xyz.com and pay or you can buy a copy. Personally, I wouldn't want shares in xyz.com

I was always brought up, you shouldn't take something that isnt yours without asking. A fairly basic concept.

As for the comment above about FBI trying to pressure nz govt to oppose bail, I find myself agreeing with many in this topic, they should keep their noses out until he is officially their problem...

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79268 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#586875 26-Feb-2012 09:57

"free" and "freemium" models don't work. It was a fad of some who believed people would pay for extra features or benefits. As found in the last years, it doesn't happen...

MikeyPI

450 posts

Ultimate Geek

#586893 26-Feb-2012 11:07

If artists won't create works without a financial incentive, how did we make it this far?
Seems like 20,000 years of human history disagrees with you.

Maybe you're confusing real creative works with sh*tty hollywood movies..

nzlemming

79 posts

Master Geek

#586915 26-Feb-2012 13:05

freitasm: "free" and "freemium" models don't work. It was a fad of some who believed people would pay for extra features or benefits. As found in the last years, it doesn't happen...

Hmm, sounds like shareware. Also, RedHat, Alfresco, Humble Indie Bundle and many other businesses that have been built on that model. It seems you won't see what you don't to see. Artists can get paid without the middleman, and it's really only the middleman that's at risk. Hence, they're the ones bringing lawsuits and getting laws changed.

The old model requires scarcity. Digital makes scarcity itself scarce by making exact copying easy. If you currently sell content, find a new business model because the world isn't going to stop for you.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79268 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#586922 26-Feb-2012 13:55

nzlemming:
freitasm: "free" and "freemium" models don't work. It was a fad of some who believed people would pay for extra features or benefits. As found in the last years, it doesn't happen...

Hmm, sounds like shareware.

Shareware was never "free" as freeware was. Most shareware was free for a period, then you pay to have more features. It was more like "freemium" instead.

RedHat and others are not in the free business, they sell their services and so on. There is some "free" in the FOSS offerings, but when it comes to services, support those are not free.

nzlemming: Artists can get paid without the middleman, and it's really only the middleman that's at risk. Hence, they're the ones bringing lawsuits and getting laws changed.

The old model requires scarcity. Digital makes scarcity itself scarce by making exact copying easy. If you currently sell content, find a new business model because the world isn't going to stop for you.

And we both think the same then.

jbard

1377 posts

Uber Geek

#586931 26-Feb-2012 14:05

freitasm: "free" and "freemium" models don't work. It was a fad of some who believed people would pay for extra features or benefits. As found in the last years, it doesn't happen...

A lot of the Android market is built on the free/donate model and it seems to work.

Sure this isn't the case in other ares or other content types.

Doesn't mean in couldn't happen though.

Brendan

716 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#587048 26-Feb-2012 19:36

MikeyPI: If artists won't create works without a financial incentive, how did we make it this far?

Seems like 20,000 years of human history disagrees with you.

Maybe you're confusing real creative works with sh*tty hollywood movies..

I agree; of course it works.

I was going to offer some examples but I see others have already done that. Instead I will offer an alternative viewpoint...

Not only does it work, but human history is THE history of information being shared freely.

Look at it this way:

1. For 10,000 years human beings shared the results of their minds work freely, resulting in the most important knowledge we yet possess - language (written), agriculture, food storage, maps, science, literature, you name it.

2. For 100 - 300 years or so, a couple of times in our history we have had the large scale suppression of this free sharing of information - The Dark Ages, and NOW (under current IP laws).

"copyright" is a short lived abnormality in the history of our civilization. It is destructive and resource wasting. The sooner it dies, the better.

I challenge any supporter of current IP law attitudes and practices to put together a credible alternative history of our civilization where these laws were strictly obeyed and result in the level of progress we currently have - or better.
A few good examples is all I need - for example, explain how Writing or Argiculture would have evolved if current IP law was enforced from the outset.

I do not think it can be done; and if it indeed cannot be done - why, oh why, this FUD and scaremongering about it's impending failure? It's long overdue.

1 | ... | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40