Who will get the first copyright infringement notice??

Forums › Off topic › Who will get the first copyright infringement notice??

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

28260 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

# 522540 18-Sep-2011 08:34

scuwp: Seen this.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10752517

Seems like either the newspaper is behind the times, or those claiming to have received notices are lying. As asked before, anyone care to actually post a copy of the notice so we can all see it?

What a terrible piece of journalism once again from The Herald. You'd think they'd at least write something that makes sence - you can't have an iPod and not have an iTunes account.

The statement that ISP's have 9 months to send notices to customers is also incorrect.

Behodar

6728 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 522551 18-Sep-2011 09:12

sbiddle: you can't have an iPod and not have an iTunes account.

Actually, you can. You can use Winamp or similar to copy music from CDs to your iPod (even iTunes may do this, I'm not sure).

Having said that, the guy has 2000 pirated songs and claims that he hasn't broken the law...

sbiddle: The statement that ISP's have 9 months to send notices to customers is also incorrect.

Yep, that one's definitely incorrect though.

scuwp

3207 posts

Uber Geek

# 522554 18-Sep-2011 09:15

sbiddle:
scuwp: Seen this.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10752517

Seems like either the newspaper is behind the times, or those claiming to have received notices are lying. As asked before, anyone care to actually post a copy of the notice so we can all see it?

What a terrible piece of journalism once again from The Herald. You'd think they'd at least write something that makes sence - you can't have an iPod and not have an iTunes account.

The statement that ISP's have 9 months to send notices to customers is also incorrect.

Agreed. I just find it amusing that one one side of the fence every comment in the media says that nil noticed have been sent out, yet there are lots of comments, including on GZ along the lines of "my mates girlfriends sisters neighbours cousin got one last week for downloading [whatever]...."

Referring back to the OP - Just wondering if anyone will ever front up and actually post a copy of the notice

Always be yourself, unless you can be Batman, then always be the Batman

old3eyes

8192 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

# 522562 18-Sep-2011 09:42

oxnsox:
dougierydal: It will be fascinating to see what Copyright Holders go after. I mean are they really going to want to have a go at someone who downloads an episode of a TV programme that isn't shown here?
Or whatabout a popular TV in the States like Fringe, which TVNZ sticks on at 1030pm.
I guess it's only illegal if someone complains about it.

Now thats like saying it's ok for you to steal the green jelly beans because we know you don't have them there... or we know someone else ate yours.
You're still stealing them.

Also TVNZ shows them about 12 months after the US airdate..

Regards,

Old3eyes

kiwigeek1

622 posts

Ultimate Geek

# 522588 18-Sep-2011 11:00

thats why p2p florishes cos the media coys dont offer what the people want

not that they cut out more then they should to put adds in
or that its delayed for up to year but also theres many great shows
you never get to see

even itunes and hulu dont cut it

what would work if they

1) offered it online at the time its broadcasted
2) cheaply of no more then .50nz per episode
after all youre paying for it in data download (like twice)
3) in free coded formats of mkv or mp4 for 720p and xvid
so none of that dmr rubbish or larger files formats they
only offer
4) any country ip can download it

just think how that wipe out p2p and how much they make

in the end tv will change with that model.. instead you download
direct on tv and it auto debits the small fee
and no ads or promo that ruin the experience like you get on sky

it probably take someone liek facebook deo to come out with it
and offer the service to media coys and make
him more billions lol

after all the notices cost them $25 with nothing to show for
it when the could instead be getting $25 for 50 episodes

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

# 522600 18-Sep-2011 11:28

what would work if they

1) offered it online at the time its broadcasted
2) cheaply of no more then .50nz per episode
after all youre paying for it in data download (like twice)
3) in free coded formats of mkv or mp4 for 720p and xvid
so none of that dmr rubbish or larger files formats they
only offer
4) any country ip can download it

just think how that wipe out p2p and how much they make

i

'they' would make huge, huge losses if they did that.

kiwigeek1

622 posts

Ultimate Geek

# 522604 18-Sep-2011 11:40

are you serious

i doubt it very much

mixed in with reg shows with ads for those that dont want to pay

you have it suit all

with a comment like that.. goes to
show its all about GREED and not
getting a fair price to the consumer

i still like the ideas that as you download it- its already
been paid for on the net.. you pay heaps for data now days
so maybe a scheme where a percentage you pay isps
is given to the media coy they isps pay media

pay $60 for isp a month for 20gb say.. thats 20 movies
so $10 in a media fun

then when infringement comes in they
pay them $1 for the movie from the fund

if the media fund is not used at end of month it
goes back to isp pocket
after all you can only download so much for the data
so theres a cap to the prating as well lol

just a thought

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek

# 522615 18-Sep-2011 12:14

kiwigeek1: are you serious

i doubt it very much

on what basis?

have you maybe worked at a large media studio in the finance department to give you the solid understanding of how much stuff costs to make?

When a movie comes out there is revenue from box office reciepts, dvd sales, dvd rental, pay tv broadcast, etc. Yes they make a lot of money, but we aren't talking 80% margins here - dropping prices to 50c is just ridiculous.

If studios just put content on the net straightway for worldwide download for 50c with no ads (or free with ads) they simply wouldn't make any money.

ETA: and your 'media fund' idea just sounds weird.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
64623 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

# 522617 18-Sep-2011 12:16

kiwigeek1: 2) cheaply of no more then .50nz per episode after all youre paying for it in data download (like twice)

That's just so wrong. One thing is the content, the other thing is the transport. Different services, different companies. You are not paying twice.

If you buy a book from Amazon you still pay shipping. What you are suggesting is like saying "I am already paying shipping, so Amazon should give me the book free or very cheap".

My technology disclosure | Digital Transformation | Enterprise Content Management | Customer Relationship Management | Data Insights, Business Intelligence and Advanced Analytics

sbiddle

28260 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

# 522618 18-Sep-2011 12:16

kiwigeek1: 1) offered it online at the time its broadcasted
2) cheaply of no more then .50nz per episode
after all youre paying for it in data download (like twice)
3) in free coded formats of mkv or mp4 for 720p and xvid
so none of that dmr rubbish or larger files formats they
only offer
4) any country ip can download it

That is a totally unsustainable business model.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
64623 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

# 522619 18-Sep-2011 12:18

kiwigeek1: i still like the ideas that as you download it- its already
been paid for on the net.. you pay heaps for data now days
so maybe a scheme where a percentage you pay isps
is given to the media coy they isps pay media

Another idea that wouldn't work. You are assuming everyone is interested in downloading content such as movies and music, but they are not. People would be paying for something they don't use.

It's like applying a tax on blank DVDs because it can be used to record a copy of movie. But it can also be used for storing your own content, for data backup, etc. Would you be happy paying a fee on something you are not using at all?

My technology disclosure | Digital Transformation | Enterprise Content Management | Customer Relationship Management | Data Insights, Business Intelligence and Advanced Analytics

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
64623 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

# 522620 18-Sep-2011 12:20

kiwigeek1: after all you can only download so much for the data so theres a cap to the prating as well lol

just a thought

Every time someone offers a (serious) idea and ends the sentence with "lol" I immediately dismiss it as a joke. You can't possible be serious and "laugh out loud" at the same time.

Just a thought.

My technology disclosure | Digital Transformation | Enterprise Content Management | Customer Relationship Management | Data Insights, Business Intelligence and Advanced Analytics

sbiddle

28260 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

# 522621 18-Sep-2011 12:21

Behodar:
sbiddle: you can't have an iPod and not have an iTunes account.

Actually, you can. You can use Winamp or similar to copy music from CDs to your iPod (even iTunes may do this, I'm not sure).

Having said that, the guy has 2000 pirated songs and claims that he hasn't broken the law...

sbiddle: The statement that ISP's have 9 months to send notices to customers is also incorrect.

Yep, that one's definitely incorrect though.

Most people are going to use iTunes to manage their iPod, even if they're just using it for the management of MP3's acquired from other sources. My point was that most people would also have an iTunes account created as part of the registation process, regardless of whether they actually use it for buying content.

kiwigeek1

622 posts

Ultimate Geek

# 522622 18-Sep-2011 12:27

whatever.. the world will change in time.. their will be people vote for my model verse the existing

paying millions to fight crime police force lawyers and alike and greed

i think your wrong.. just cant look outside the box

your not read what I mwant ... i aid if they put in a claim the isps
can pay from the fund

im sure the bulk of media is for video and software and the isp know it

alexcc

151 posts

Master Geek

# 522623 18-Sep-2011 12:30

kiwigeek1: whatever.. the world will change in time.. their will be people vote for my model verse the existing

paying millions to fight crime police force lawyers and alike and greed

i think your wrong.. just cant look outside the box

your not read what I mwant ... i aid if they put in a claim the isps
can pay from the fund

im sure the bulk of media is for video and software and the isp know it

I'm sorry but something like that would ruin everything good. A system like that just wouldn't work. There wouldn't be a reason for tv shows or movies to be made anymore since there wouldn't be any profit in it. Just getting a percentage of the money going to the ISPs and 50 cents per episode will not be enough. Could cover production costs but there will be little if any profit. Who wants to work just to break even?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6