[quote=“Jaboney”]No, I’m sure that entertaining forumosans don’t earn too much.
I’m also sure that any money they make comes from performance, rather than mass production and distribution.
[/quote]
Somehow, I missed this post before I posted the previous one. My thoughts exactly.
[quote=“Jaboney”]Ditto games.[/quote]You’re saying I, me personally, was earning too much, much less than a teacher, before I was made redundant because my company went bankrupt ? Is that what you think of me ?
I never looked down on anyone and laughed while counting my filthy immorally earned lucre. I was just trying to earn a living wage for a hard day’s work, something that some people seem to be against.
The gaming industry now takes in more revenue than does Hollywood. It’s not well distributed. A list of computer game makers. (Sorry, I don’t have time to search out the highest earners today.) Which one is yours?
And a living wage? A living wage. Is that what this is about? Why, that’s right out of those stupid MPAA theatre adverts: “Pirates steal money from carpenters who build the sets…” My ass. This is about corporate greed, and milking every last possible penny of revenue. If it’s about a living wage, perhaps you’d explain why I should support EA’s abusive labour practices. Distinguish, please, between the large scale and small; between the money the corp brings in, and the money the ordinary Joes take home. And don’t ask me to believe that the more money the corp brings in, the more Joe will take home home. It ain’t so.
You’re right on several points there. But why does it make it ok ?
Goose egg/Maoman, are you going to uphold this rule ? “Do not promote illegal activities. Links to warez sites or discussion of warez is not permitted. Breach of this rule can lead to legal proceedings against this site, and will not be tolerated. In cases where the law has been broken, Forumosa may notify the proper authorities if appropriate.”
And do you support what I am trying to do ? Yes or No. Please answer. Others are welcome to answer this too.
What’s right about acquiescing in a bad system? What are the other options, entirely boycott these forms of cultural production? Beak off at the front line retailer over the exorbitant prices… for which they’re only marginally responsible? That would help, how? Sometimes, the end does justify the means. If the action brings about change in the right direction, and no one is harmed… save for the pocket books of those doing the exploiting… why need the action be right in and of itself? In France, tossing sabot in the machinery worked to improve relations of production, while in England it was having young children fall asleep and fall into the machinery and gum it up that did the trick (seriously, this was the argument that swayed Parliament). Were those right and proper? No. Was a bad situation rectified as a result? Yes. Bit torrent’s reverse economics (the more who want it the faster you get it) offers people a chance to throw a clog in the distribution gears. I don’t much care what a bad law says. Strike that: I feel morally obliged to break bad laws. When the laws in question are constantly being rewritten to ensure that “Steamboat Willy” keeps Mickey Mouse in Disney’s Monetary Kingdom, that’s still less problematic.
The magic of capitalism comes through a relentless scouring away of inefficient and outdate means of getting the job done. Funny that those in the culture and entertainment markets should go running to gov’t seeking ever longer monopoly rights.
I’ve got no problem whatsoever with artists maintaining creative control over their works. I support everyone getting a living wage, and those who can earning something better. But I really don’t think that’s in question here, save for those poor guys who serve as frontline retailers. And I’m not about to support a bad industrial design for the sake of its public face.
I’ve never said you don’t deserve to make money and I’ve never advocated breaking the law to undermine your business. So what have I done personally to deserve that from you ? I don’t even set the prices.
[quote]I’ve got no problem whatsoever with artists maintaining creative control over their works.[/quote]Yes you do, you want to get everything for free, no matter who suffers. And you want everyone else to do the same.
[quote]I support everyone getting a living wage, and those who can earning something better.[/quote]No you don’t, you’ve already said you don’t support me getting a living wage.
You? Nothing. Reread that last part:
As always in capitalism, it ain’t personal, it’s business. If I can help it, I’m not going to support a bad business model. If you were in another line of business, I’d be more than happy to support you.
Again, distinguish between the art and the industry. I know the old “there ain’t no show without the business,” line, and agree with it. It’s a question of degree. Again, not your take, the big boys’.
[quote=“jdsmith”]Well, the industry says, “Watching illegal downloads is like stealing money from the industry.”
I am not certain I believe that. They don’t automatically get my money when they make a movie/cd/tv show, so I’m not “stealing” from them, am I? I am not breaking into a theatre to watch a film. I’m getting it for free using free, legal (maybe??) and easily available technology.[/quote]
For most stuff, with the exception of Open Office, Linux etc., it is not legal. You download e.g. the latest Hollywood blockbuster, the new CD from your favorite artist or Microsoft latest operating system (Vista has just been released) it usually illegal.
There is a copyright on those things and you are supposed to pay for the “consumption” by means of a movie ticket or buying the CD/DVD.
By obtaining and using illegal copies you are in breach of those copyrights, nevermind aiding the criminials that actually do the stealing (by recording/making copies etc/).
[quote]It is not money I “take.” It is more, “money they don’t get.”
Does that make sense?[/quote]
I understand this and I always said that the industry is not correct to calculate the damage (cost) based on the number of illegal copies for this reason, but it does IMO not justify obtaining and using copyrighted materials without paying.
One of the best reasons to support the technology, legal or not… Eventually, the old school industry will adopt it. And this technology is better for the environment and consumers.
[quote=“Wired.com”]BitTorrent seems to be expanding faster than ever. As reported on Monkey Bites blog, Cohen’s San Francisco company is forming distribution partnerships with several major film and television studios, including 20th Century Fox, MTV Networks, G4, Palm Pictures and Paramount Pictures. In May 2006, BitTorrent teamed up with Warner Bros. to distribute films and televisions shows online.
The company also said last week it has secured an additional $20 million in funding from Accel Partners and Doll Capital Management to make the video store a reality.[/quote]
Tangential, but nonetheless relevant.
What havoc is the current wave of technological innovation wreaking? Consider the impact of the “Rip, Mix, Burn” boys behind Apple’s media savvy products and marketing…
[quote=“tuaw”]RIAA petitions for lower artist royalties
IGN reports that innovative marketing solutions like Apple’s iTunes store and stores that sell digital ringtones are putting too much money into the pockets of the artists who actually create and perform music. The RIAA has petitioned the federal US Copyright Royalty Judges to lower the rates paid to songwriters for the digital use of their creations. Apparently things have changed a great deal since 1981, the last time the US government set the royalty rates.
The petition brief apparently read in part, “Mechanical royalties currently are out of whack with historical and international rates…We hope the judges will restore the proper balance by reducing the rate and moving to a more flexible percentage rate structure so that record companies can continue to create the sound recordings that drive revenues for music publishers.”[/quote]
Boo hoo, the all powerful suits no longer have the quite the same hammer to hold over the unwashed artists.
Sometimes technological progress favours capital-intensive orgs such that power, wealth, and influence accumulate.
At the moment, this wave of technological progress favours distributed networks, such that power, goods, and influence are dispersed. Yippy. 
I don’t understand why this seems so complicated
We decided long ago that we would remove and discourage illicitly downloading copyright material - if you do not have permission from the owner of the material to download it, then this website is against it.
Debating and discussing the subject of illegal downloads is fine, but if you post a link to or describe a way to acquire something without properly paying for it (including links to “illegal” torrent), then expect us to enforce our rules and remove it asap. And if you see something that looks fishy, let us know and we’ll remove it