Hmm, I apparently never noticed this thread. I only got half way down, to Goldie Wilson, and had lost count of the posts I wanted to quote, so..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
I don't see why people calculate a download as "lost revenue." I think it's wrong to assume that people download instead of buy something. I think many downloads are of things people wouldn't have bought in the first place.
|
They must be hearing that from the studios and going along with it. There was a great line graph at dontbuycds.org that showed CD sales along with the rise and fall of the original Napster. Sales were increasing with Napster's popularity, then upon shutdown took a sharp dive. I download stuff I'm unsure about, but rarely don't buy something I like.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikilidstrom
I just feel that watching first runs anywhere other than a theatre or blu-ray takes away from the experience of seeing the film for the first time. The quality of streams and torrents for new movies is often questionable, and I don't have a 30' x 40' screen sitting at my house.
Having said all of that, the increasing number of assholes that attend movies now makes me yearn for the day when first runs will stream to the home, and theatres will be a thing of the past.
|
I disagree because the quality at mainstream theaters, the only ones who have big new releases, is often questionable as well. Sometimes one auditorium is fine and another is close to unusable, but for some reason they'll put a new movie in the crappy auditorium on opening night and so I listened to 2 hours of static from one side. Also, chatter and simultaneous laughter are fine, but multiple threats of violence, in front of children no less, are not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yournamehere
As far as music goes, I don't buy - I download. For two reasons ; First, most of the music I download is "classic" rock, and I already purchased the vinyl thirty years ago. I figure paying once is enough.
|
Funny thing. I'm 26, and for years I heard those old folks joke that vinyl was better than CD's us youngins like. That's actually true. Find a CD that says it's remastered and was published recently, and a CD from the 80's or older. Play each without changing the volume, and you'll notice the new one is louder. I don't know enough about sound waves to describe this properly, but for some type of experiment studios decided to modify the waves to increase the volume. The downside is that detail in the music is lost. One studio went back to CD's with correct complexity to the recording, but received numerous complaints about low volume from customers. Why pay again, for music that isn't better, or may be worse than your old copy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlatan
That's the beauty of buying the tracks online. You just buy the songs you like.
|
I would object to the paying for MP3's, since the compression is old, outdated, and terrible compared to other audio compression, but since music CD's are lower quality now than they were when they were invented there's not much to complain about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wes Mantooth
Downloading illegal music and movies is really just the customers giving a big middle finger to the industry, or at least that's how I look at it.
Neither the music or movie industry has grasped that you can't just keep ripping off your customers and expect them to be faithful in return. If they priced based on quality or maybe didn't release every piece of crap that might make money I don't think illegal downloading would be any near as common as it is.
..
Personally I've stopped buying music and movies years ago, I've just been burned to many times...I have been getting into itunes in the last few years though, the prices are reasonable and being able to download the songs you want is a HUGE step in the right direction.
|
Off the top of my head.. I have to contact WB to find out how to get the expensive Blu-Ray I bought, because they gave me a duplicate of a bonus disc instead of the actual movie. Rootkits are, uh, not good; good move, Sony. I also love when I put in a movie and try to hit Menu, Next, etc. because I want to watch the damn movie, but it's been disabled. None of those are monetary but they all are a pain in the ass.
As for iTunes.. I don't dislike the concept, but considering its legality it is a bit on the BS side. Unless you hate The Beatles.
---------- Post added at 05:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:15 PM ----------
Had to come back for some more ranting. Sorry if that's what most of these two posts are..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlatan
Film and television are another matter. Production of these cost a lot of money and unlike music are the medium (where as music is both live and recorded). I think rights holders are nuts (in any medium) to be aggressively prosecuting their fan base. They need to work out cheaper modes of earning revenue and distributing the final product. The traditional forms are costly to produce and distribute.
|
They treat their fan base so poorly that there was a comic where a man comes to the beach and talks to two people, using metaphors representing industry actions, the last of which was peeing on the fans.. and it resulted in everybody laughing because of its accuracy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldie Wilson
I tend to look at downloading a different way -- not as a vote against a tyrannical and out of touch mega-industry, but as a vote against the independent record stores and movie theaters that are struggling in this economy as it is. (This is when the small business owner in me comes out full force.) I just can't help but see a really, really fine line between crusader against corporate injustice and person who wants things for free. It just gets so disheartening to talk to friends who have hard drives full of downloaded music and then tell me, "but I support them by going to see their shows!" Eh, I'd be one thing if they did, but going out to see a show every 6 months doesn't help help as much as you think.
|
Going to a show helps a hell of a lot more than buying an album. The group itself gets much less than a dollar per album sold.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
So for me, going to the theatre is a real treat. Big screen, big sound, big group of people. And as overpriced the food is, it's pretty good in that grody kind of way.
|
Food at independent theaters is of much higher quality, and its pricing and selection is similar to any decent restaurant, so no complaints about that. However, last time I got food of the "grody" kind at the common theater, it gave me diarrhea so strong that my thigh seemed to spasm and I missed the end of the movie. I stopped buying whatever that stuff really is, but still get a layer of something sticky across the sole of my shoe. The staff is either incompetent or they don't care. I bet lots of people are really irritated by these things. You're lucky, it sounds like the theaters in your town are wonderful.
Xerxys, that story reminded me of a great RIAA attack on piracy. Remember when the fastest CD burners were around 12x and 16x? Then all of a sudden faster ones came out!?! It was some sort of "advancement" in technology.. I didn't know there were advancements in technology.
Anyway, the RIAA made some weird official statement using the number of CD burners to determine how much money they lost. However, they lied about the number of CD burners because the burners were faster than what was "normal" (e.g. 10 40x burners were found which is 5 times faster than the 8x average, so there were 50 burners). This was to their advantage because the number of burners was what determined their loss, a speed increase did not. I think the burners weren't being constantly used around the clock; the faster speed made burning a set of pirated CD's quicker, rather than the total number larger.