Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Should a site similiar to D-Addicts be created for Japanese Movies? |
| Yes |
|
85% |
[ 131 ] |
| No |
|
14% |
[ 23 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 154 |
|
| Author |
Message |
krys Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Total posts: 135 Gender: Unknown |
 Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 5:49 am Post subject: Post Rating: 0 |
 |
|
| jholic wrote: | | if all of those subs were ripped from dvd's, then why are there 4-8 different versions of subs for the same movie?? four to eight different dvd's? i don't think so. |
Ripped by different people, having some phrases/errors corrected, adjusted to 1/2/3 cd encodes...
| Quote: | | you are incorrect. there are about four of them (fluent in jp/eng), and they actually sit in front of computers/video players and hard code them into vhs or cd. i watch quite a bit of anime, but i rarely particpate in their forums or anything. but my friends have mentioned |
Now, is there anything to add to your own comment? I still think you are incorrect.
| Quote: | | that there are quite a few subbers on the mainland. |
What is that mainland?
| Quote: | | i don't believe it is 'scarce.' |
You may believe whatever you wish. It is your choice. But i know it its.
| Quote: | | furthermore, i want to point out that the nature of FANsubbing is that fans actually sub the eps. most of the anime that are fansubbed have not come out on dvd's (otherwise, they would be licensed, and most fansubbers will not sub licensed anime). therefore, the subs could not have been ripped from dvd's. |
It seems you are talking about hardsubs now. Can not see the difference?
| Quote: | | since you have no stats, and neither do i, we are at an impas |
I have no stats but you have no subs so it is not an impasse at all.
| Quote: | | however, if a site like kloofy's did not exist, i think most people would believe that fansubbing of asian movies were scarce as well. |
Fansubs of asian movies are scarce as most of them (if not all) are shipped with english subs already so there is no need to translate.
| Quote: | | thanks for your insightful reply. |
I rarely descend and bother with the issue of minuscules but it is nice to see my efforts are appreciated when i do.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
beerJoined: 28 Jan 2004 Total posts: 556 Gender: Unknown |
| Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 1:18 pm Post subject: Post Rating: 0 |
|
|
Just briefly about anime:
Since the onslaught of .ogm and .mkv formats there have actually been a few initiatives in fansubbing world to include multiple languages in the same package. Nevertheless I don't seriously remember seeing any softfansub, unless it was to replace the subs from a ripped HK-DVD.
Actually griping about hardsubs, their typesetting and timing is one of the favorite pastimes of anime community.
Then again, I beg to differ from the opinion that 'most' Asian movie DVDs come with ripped subititles. I appear to have movies aplenty for which subtitles appeared significantly later. Curiously - most such subtitles showed up at kloofy's first.
And returning to drama subtitles, with all due respect and everything, I really-really wish someone would do something about Uso Koi subtitles. I could fix the English and timing myself, except that I have severe doubts about whether the existing Engrish has any (even supreficial) connection with the original Japanese spoken. The English subs for spoken English in that series usually say something different. This, if anything, would be a definitely worthy project for d-addicts.
BTW: As opposed to JTV's joke about facial expressions I think this series relies on those expressions too heavily.
P.S. Should JTV, on the other hand, need someone to translate their Triumph in the Skies subs into English, I'd be happy to oblige since I have respect for the group (except for QC for this series) and I like the series pretty much. Especially when a 400 meter dash from the cathedral to the town hall takes the biker across the river in Firenze. 
/me wipes foam off the corners of his mouth and settles down to watch something.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jholicJoined: 03 Feb 2004 Total posts: 6153 Location: missin' hawaii Gender: Male |
| Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 5:44 pm Post subject: Post Rating: 0 |
|
|
| ad wrote: | There won't be no flame. What's your point, dude? Be more specific. Borders, surely, won't appreciate your going into the store with a scanner. They will be very unhappy.
Some of us can't marry Matsu Takako and that makes us very unhappy, so what? Bill Gate won't be happy until everybody on the planet will be running windows, and linux kids wont be happy till Billy is dead. Everybody can't be happy. |
sorry, i had to leave, so i rushed the ending, but i thought the point was still clear. i'm addressing my opinion on the many posts i see about fair use, perusing, trying it out before you buy, etc. there are several people that seem to compare what we are doing to borrowing a book at the library, listening to a cd at a store, downloading a preview, reading a book at borders, etc.
though i love this site and many of the people on it, support freedom of speech, love the ability to d/l and trade things on the internet, etc, i won't kid myself and try to sugar-coat it. it's not the same as "previewing" something.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adJoined: 10 Mar 2004 Total posts: 89 Location: LA Gender: Male |
| Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 8:31 pm Post subject: Post Rating: 0 |
|
|
| jholic wrote: |
though i love this site and many of the people on it, support freedom of speech, love the ability to d/l and trade things on the internet, etc, i won't kid myself and try to sugar-coat it. it's not the same as "previewing" something. |
I think it's pretty close to previewing. I do buy CDs and DVDs. I paid for all my Mozart, Bach, Beethoven and Led Zeppelin music. But unlike groink i will never pay $20 for a movie i haven't seen before (and therefore i know i'll want to watch again). I dont' pirate Hollywood movies. I rent them at Blockbuster for $3. But i can't " preview" j-movies at Blockbuster so i preview them on the internet. I would pay $3 per movie if somebody bothered to collect it. It just happens that i still have digital copies of the movies on my hard drive after "previewing". I delete most of them anyway.
Technological progress enabled encoding of high quality video on portable media and at the same time it also enabled transmission of high fidelity copies of the digital media. The world is changing fast these days we have to adapt and not to try to stay in the past.
I don't care about copyright laws. Laws can be changed and not all laws are strictly enforced. The crux of the matter is whtat people think is "right " and "moral" and what is not. Of course, all these things are functions of time and place. But if the majority of the population thinks that downloading music and movies is normal the laws will have to change of way of another. You can't outlaw the majority, usually it leads to revolutions.
One possible scenario, the list of the MPs who voted for the DMCA and similar acts gets posted on Kazaa and emule web sites and also gets distrubuted thru the networks. THe p2p network users have become a very large group of people with common interests connected by fast and reliable communication networks. It's just a matter of time before they become a strong political force.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BT-SlutJoined: 08 Apr 2004 Total posts: 1130 Location: China Age: 23 Gender: Female |
| Posted: Wed May 26, 2004 10:12 pm Post subject: Post Rating: 0 |
|
|
| ad wrote: | Technological progress enabled encoding of high quality video on portable media and at the same time it also enabled transmission of high fidelity copies of the digital media. The world is changing fast these days we have to adapt and not to try to stay in the past.
I don't care about copyright laws. Laws can be changed and not all laws are strictly enforced. The crux of the matter is whtat people think is "right " and "moral" and what is not. Of course, all these things are functions of time and place. But if the majority of the population thinks that downloading music and movies is normal the laws will have to change of way of another. You can't outlaw the majority, usually it leads to revolutions.
|
This is stated very well ad. I agree with you 100%. The draconian copyright laws will change in the future. Laws and politics swing on a pendulum. Right now, it's swinging overly extreme to one side and it will correct it self shortly.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jholicJoined: 03 Feb 2004 Total posts: 6153 Location: missin' hawaii Gender: Male |
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 2:39 am Post subject: Post Rating: 0 |
|
|
| ad wrote: | | I think it's pretty close to previewing. |
i don't think it's close. refer to my earlier post. i believe a "preview" is a few quotes from a magazine, five minutes from a movie, 40 sec from a song, etc. not the whole thing.
| ad wrote: | | I delete most of them anyway. |
you're a better man than i. however, i don't believe you are in the majority.
| ad wrote: | | Technological progress enabled encoding of high quality video on portable media and at the same time it also enabled transmission of high fidelity copies of the digital media. The world is changing fast these days we have to adapt and not to try to stay in the past. |
according to what you just said, technology should be the driving force of our laws. since we now have better technology, we can use it for practically any purpose? nowadays, people shell out $10-20 a pop for a movie. you think a 5min preview is enough to get me into a theater? no way. i gotta be able to watch the entire thing before i go in.
since X has a tiny digital camera that can see through walls, he can just face it toward the shower of his neighbor's house. when Z gets the file, he should be able to share it to whomever he pleases. otherwise, why did he spend $1800 on his computer equip?
people make laws. technology does not. i hope it always stays that way.
| ad wrote: | | I don't care about copyright laws. Laws can be changed and not all laws are strictly enforced. The crux of the matter is whtat people think is "right " and "moral" and what is not. Of course, all these things are functions of time and place. But if the majority of the population thinks that downloading music and movies is normal the laws will have to change of way of another. You can't outlaw the majority, usually it leads to revolutions. |
spoken like a true young rebel.
but think carefully about what you said. the 'majority' often changes its mind (that's why laws are not created by the 'majority), especially when the outcome starts affecting the individuals in the majority. and the 'majority' will not be in your courtroom backing you when the RIAA sues you.
the crux of the matter is NOT what people think is right and moral, etc. the crux is WHAT PEOPLE THINK THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH. c'mon, isn't that why we're here? if the RIAA sued 100% of the people who d/ls, and won 100% of the time, how many people do you honestly think would still be doing it?
the MAJORITY of the people here knows d/l apps, movies, dramas, etc. is wrong. that is a fact. but, most do it because there is little chance they will get caught. agreed?
sometimes you jaywalk. you don't wear your seatbelt. you speed. you take a pen home from work. etc. do you realize how many people steal (big or small)? muggings, robbery, banks, petty thefts, identity theft, printer paper from school, rulers from work, etc. people do it all the dang time!! the laws gotta change to accomodate the majority. if i see your backpack sitting alone on that chair, i've got a fundamental right to take it home and guard the belongings better than you, right?
the laws need to be based on what is right. not what the majority feels. you and i both know much of what goes on in p2p is wrong. but it's done because we haven't gotten the 'letter' yet (like Ruroshin). we are doing it because we feel we can get away with it.
BT Slut: perhaps, one day, the laws will be a little more relaxed, but i doubt laws will ever allow people to get other people's material w/o some type of compensation. this country was built on the backs of hardworking entrepenuers. their rights have to be respected too.
i have to side w/ groink on this one. i love being able to d/l stuff, but as soon as a letter comes, its time to be much more careful. j-addicts would only increase the exposure to our community (and getting caught), so i vote we keep ourselves on the downlow.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BT-SlutJoined: 08 Apr 2004 Total posts: 1130 Location: China Age: 23 Gender: Female |
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 3:53 am Post subject: Post Rating: 0 |
|
|
| jholic wrote: |
the MAJORITY of the people here knows d/l apps, movies, dramas, etc. is wrong. that is a fact. but, most do it because there is little chance they will get caught. agreed?
sometimes you jaywalk. you don't wear your seatbelt. you speed. you take a pen home from work. etc. do you realize how many people steal (big or small)? muggings, robbery, banks, petty thefts, identity theft, printer paper from school, rulers from work, etc. people do it all the dang time!! the laws gotta change to accomodate the majority. if i see your backpack sitting alone on that chair, i've got a fundamental right to take it home and guard the belongings better than you, right?
the laws need to be based on what is right. not what the majority feels. you and i both know much of what goes on in p2p is wrong. but it's done because we haven't gotten the 'letter' yet (like Ruroshin). we are doing it because we feel we can get away with it.
BT Slut: perhaps, one day, the laws will be a little more relaxed, but i doubt laws will ever allow people to get other people's material w/o some type of compensation. this country was built on the backs of hardworking entrepenuers. their rights have to be respected too.
i have to side w/ groink on this one. i love being able to d/l stuff, but as soon as a letter comes, its time to be much more careful. j-addicts would only increase the exposure to our community (and getting caught), so i vote we keep ourselves on the downlow. |
jholic, I debated for some time whether to post this or not, but ultimately decided to take the time and reply to you. Because I really want you to understand the fundamental issue here. I don't believe the majority of people realize the whole situation.
In your post, you state that downloading movies or music is wrong but we do it because we can get away with it. I believe you've been brainwashed by the propaganda and actually believe the bullshit rhetoric. It is NOT wrong and I'll explain why.
Even the Supreme Court of the United States has declared that copyright infringement for personal use is NOT the same thing as physical theft. Piracy is NOT a term used by the courts. It is a term used by the industry to paint a very negative image of people downloading files.
Now let me explain why copyright infringement is not wrong for personal use. In all the examples you cite above, when someone breaks the law, it's a physical, tangible action. When you 'steal' a pen from work or use the copying machine at work to make personal copies, there is actual physical resources that is being diverted from the company to you. That is to say, for every pen you take home, there is one less pen for the company's use. For every copy you make on the Xerox machine at work, there is one less copy for the company's consumption. So this is real, physical theft. Your gain is at the direct expense of the company's.
The HUGE difference with copyright infringement is that when you gain, NO ONE really loses. That is to say, if you make a copy of MSFT Office at work and bring it home to use, the company you made the copy at still has MSFT Office to use. You have not taken something from the company to use at your home. They still have a copy and now you have a copy. Your gain was not created at the expense of the company. And NO, it's not at the expense of MSFT because you never would have purchased MSFT Office for $495 even if you weren't able to make a copy from work.
Another example. If you go into a Blockbuster and physically steal a DVD movie, that is a real theft. Your gain of a DVD movie was at the expense of Blockbuster because Blockbuster could have sold that physical copy to someone else. But if you go to your friends house and copy the movie to your own DVD-R, there is no loss to anyone. Your friend still has the copy. Your gain is NOT at the expense of someone else. Again, if you download a movie from the internet, your gain is NOT at the expense of someone else.
The argument from the industry is that they've indeed lost a sale because had you NOT been allowed to make a copy, you would have gone out and purchased the item. Well, as groink likes to say, that's BULLSHIT. A person wouldn't have gone out and purchased Adobe Photoshop or MSFT Office for $700 and $495 respectively if they weren't able to download it over the net. The totally bullshit revenue figures you hear from the software, music, and movie industries about potential sales they would have had if it weren't for "piracy" is total BS. They would NEVER have sold those copies to begin with.
Simply put, copyright infringement for personal use is NOT wrong. When I download a movie from the net, it's a virutal duplication that was accomplished at the expense of NO ONE. NO ONE lost because I made a virtual copy. Yes, I have gained, but at no one's expense. I wouldn't have purchased the movie if I weren't able to download it. The movie industry wants to pretend that I would have gone out and purchased the movie. That's just wishful thinking. I would NOT have. It is only because I could download the movie for free that I downloaded it. They ignore this huge fact. Because it was FREE, people download the movies. These lies about potential sales lost is pure BS.
When there is a real issue for prosecution is when the duplicated copy is sold for a profit. If I download a movie from the net and burn it to a CD-R and sell that copy to someone else for a profit, then it is indeed wrong. Because in this example, I am actually profitting from someone else's work. The people who actually download these movies and re-sell them for a profit should definitely be prosecuted. I agree with that. In this case, because I have sold a copy to someone else, I have profitted at the expense of the original copyright holder. There was a real demand by someone who wanted to pay for a copy of the work. This copy that I sold and made a profit on should have been sold by the original copyright holder and s/he should have made the profit. In a case like that, I would agree that it's wrong.
But for home users who download a copy to view for themselves only, it is not wrong. But you have been led to believe that this is wrong and you've bought into the propaganda. However, I tell you again, it is NOT wrong. It really does fall under the fair use catagory. So long as you do not make a profit from the creative work of someone else, you are not doing anything wrong. For pesonal use, you've not profitted from someone else's efforts.
When you go to the library to borrow books to read or borrow DVD movies to watch, you don't have to pay to borrow and view the items. Do you think that's wrong? In the old days, it was because of limited technology that one couldn't easily replicate the media which required that you go back to the library and return the items you've borrowed. Well, now a days, the technology actually exists so that it's a moot process. The book or movie can be replicated without cost. It's totally a political issue. It's about greed and exploitation.
One day, we may be lucky enough to have a world where everything is open sourced. Books, music, movies and software are all open sourced and will be distributed over the internet freely.
Last edited by BT-Slut on Thu May 27, 2004 4:03 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adJoined: 10 Mar 2004 Total posts: 89 Location: LA Gender: Male |
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 4:03 am Post subject: Post Rating: 0 |
|
|
| jholic wrote: |
i don't think it's close. refer to my earlier post. i believe a "preview" is a few quotes from a magazine, five minutes from a movie, 40 sec from a song, etc. not the whole thing.
|
I put "previewing" in quotes because it's more like renting. I'd rent this stuff at Blockbuster but it doesn't carry it. I'd pay $3 per movie but don't know who give it to.
| jholic wrote: |
since X has a tiny digital camera that can see through walls, he can just face it toward the shower of his neighbor's house. when Z gets the file, he should be able to share it to whomever he pleases. otherwise, why did he spend $1800 on his computer equip?
|
if you dumb enough to get videotaped in your own shower then you deserve the pictures of your sorry naked a$$ posteed on the internet.
| jholic wrote: |
people make laws. technology does not. i hope it always stays that way.
|
People make laws to control the society. Technology shapes the society. Thus laws must change to be relevant. The advent of automobile, for example, created the necesity of updating and better enfocing traffic laws.
| jholic wrote: |
spoken like a true young rebel.
|
I'm almost thirty, i bet i'm older than you. ...Perhaps i'm young at heart. 
| jholic wrote: |
but think carefully about what you said. the 'majority' often changes its mind (that's why laws are not created by the 'majority), especially when the outcome starts affecting the individuals in the majority. and the 'majority' will not be in your courtroom backing you when the RIAA sues you.
|
I very carefully think berore posting stuff, that's why the number of my posts is so low.
The laws are not created BY the majority, of course, they are created FOR the majority.
Majority does not rule because mob cannot govern but in the long run majority prevails.
| jholic wrote: |
and the 'majority' will not be in your courtroom backing you when the RIAA sues you.
|
Remeber that russian hacker who hacked Adobe ebook encryption.
| jholic wrote: |
if the RIAA sued 100% of the people who d/ls, and won 100% of the time, how many people do you honestly think would still be doing it?
|
The same 100%. Only after next election.
| jholic wrote: |
you take a pen home from work. etc. do you realize how many people steal (big or small)? muggings, robbery, banks, petty thefts, identity theft, printer paper from school, rulers from work, etc. people do it all the dang time!! the laws gotta change to accomodate the majority.
|
The majority people around me DO NOT STEAL!!!. They would even return a vallet if they found it in the street. Perhaps, they should send more police officers to your neighborhood.
| jholic wrote: |
the laws need to be based on what is right. not what the majority feels.
|
And who determines what's right.
Ok, lets stop the discussion right here. There is fundamental difference between you and i. It seems you believe in existence of absolute "right " and "wrong" and i believe those thing are relative. I use the perception of the majority of populace at given time as reference. What's right and what's wrong is a function of time and place. For example, slavery was "right" in the US 150 years ago, and "wrong" now. Divorce was not allowed in Europe some 600 years but ok now.
Some people, however, believe that there are absolute''moral" values, defined by the Bible, Coran, Adolf Hitler or George W. Bush. You can't argue with those people, all you can do is turn away and run, run, run....
PS By the way, what did the Bible say about copyright infrigment? What? there's no word copyright there?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BT-SlutJoined: 08 Apr 2004 Total posts: 1130 Location: China Age: 23 Gender: Female |
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 4:10 am Post subject: Post Rating: 0 |
|
|
| ad wrote: | Divorce was not allowed in Europe some 600 years but ok now.
|
If it were only so. Not until 1999 or 2000, did the constitution of Ireland change to allow for divorce. So prior to this change, it was absolutely illegal--technically--to get a divorce.
I agree you absolutely. Laws are a function of time and place. It's perfectly legal to have multiple wives in Saudia Arabia in 2004. And as of May 18th 2004, gays can get legally married in the state of MA. Fuction of time and place indeed.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krysJoined: 13 Jan 2004 Total posts: 135 Gender: Unknown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jholicJoined: 03 Feb 2004 Total posts: 6153 Location: missin' hawaii Gender: Male |
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 11:04 pm Post subject: Post Rating: 0 |
|
|
BT Slut/ad: i harbor no animosity toward either of you, since we all share the love of the same thing. as you both stated, we just have differing views of the p2p situation.
don't worry, i don't believe i'm any more affected by propoganda than either of you are. no matter how you look at it, everyone has been affected by media/propaganda/whatever in some way. i just think our life experiences have been different, and therefore, we have differing views on certain situations.
i thought both of your posts held strong opinions which i respect. i agree with some things, but not all. to be fair, i will also address some of your statements.
| BT-Slut wrote: | | The argument from the industry is that they've indeed lost a sale because had you NOT been allowed to make a copy, you would have gone out and purchased the item. Well, as groink likes to say, that's BULLSHIT. A person wouldn't have gone out and purchased Adobe Photoshop or MSFT Office for $700 and $495 respectively if they weren't able to download it over the net. The totally bullshit revenue figures you hear from the software, music, and movie industries about potential sales they would have had if it weren't for "piracy" is total BS. They would NEVER have sold those copies to begin with. |
although i believe the figures may be bloated, but it is not totally bs. many people do not pay the exorbitant costs of computer software because there is an ALTERNATIVE (dl it for free off of the net). if there were absolutely NO alternative, people (who want that software) would be forced to buy it. since there is statistical proof of revenue, then there are people who are willing to pay the cost. perhaps YOU would not, but there are others who would - therefore, proving there is a theoritical loss of revenue.
right now, if you want a lexus - you have no choice but to go and buy one. there isn't an alternative. but let's say there was a technology that could duplicate a lexus from nothing. this technology is freely distributed to others. everyone starts duplicating lexuses. are you saying that lexus would not experience a loss in revenue?
there is the often debated issue about exorbitant costs being caused by piracy, and vice versa. trust me, software costs would be cheaper if it were not for piracy. same as insurance costs would be cheaper if not for fraud, doctor bills would be cheaper if not for malpractice, etc. i'm not saying it would be fair or what you would be willing to pay - but cheaper.
now, let me ask: how many people pay for insurance/doctors? many. how many believe the prices to be fair? not many. why do you keep paying? there's no ALTERNATIVE. if you had a cheaper or free alternative, would you take it? yes. would those insurance companies/doctors then experience revenue loss?
| BT-Slut wrote: | | When you go to the library to borrow books to read or borrow DVD movies to watch, you don't have to pay to borrow and view the items. Do you think that's wrong? |
ah, yes. the library example again. first of all, in hawaii, public libraries DO charge a nominal fee for dvd rentals. (yes, the cost of living in paradise). do you think that the library sprouted from the roots of trees? the books and dvds appeared magically or were all donated by the library fairy? most libraries are run by the government, therefore we ALL pay for the library - through our TAXES (some people contribute more through donations). and thus, i do not feel one bit of guilt when borrowing from the library.
but in your defense, would i copy a dvd from the library (if i knew there were a low percentage chance of me getting caught)? yes. would i know it was wrong? yes (according to current law). why would i do it? explained below.
| ad wrote: | | I'm almost thirty, i bet i'm older than you. ...Perhaps i'm young at heart. |
HA! i'm older than you so hand me back my cane, dammit!! 
| ad wrote: | Some people, however, believe that there are absolute''moral" values, defined by the Bible, Coran, Adolf Hitler or George W. Bush. You can't argue with those people, all you can do is turn away and run, run, run....
PS By the way, what did the Bible say about copyright infrigment? What? there's no word copyright there? |
i respect the views/laws of other countries, but i try to concentrate on our own. many people are quick to point out some great laws of countries overseas. but what if we took ALL the laws of that other country? hm, not as quick.
| BT-Slut wrote: | | One day, we may be lucky enough to have a world where everything is open sourced. Books, music, movies and software are all open sourced and will be distributed over the internet freely. |
in some ways, we would be lucky, and in some ways, we won't.
ok, some questions:
1. you all know american idol. while watching it, i couldn't help but think of an irony. the contestants are all 16 - 24yrs old. given the demographics of music d/lers, i can safely say that several of them probably d/l music from the net. i wonder how those contestants will feel when other people are d/ling their songs and cutting into their profits.
so what if you were an entertainment talent/employee? (not superstar status, but just good enough to eek out a living.) but you're not in college anymore, got a family to support, and more bills to pay. your agent tells you that the song/movie/whatever (that you helped on) is top of the charts!! but revenue from cd/dvd/boxofc sales is just kinda average (most of it going to the people that sign your paycheck). great news is that its the number one most downloaded thing on the net!
do you feel your views about d/ling would change? do you feel other d/lers, placed in that situation, would feel the same as you?
2. your utopia of the internet comes true! media is now open-source. it is completely legal to dl/trade/etc off the net.
how would entertainment workers make money? (i don't mean just the actors/actresses/ceo/producers) why would writers write? singers sing? how about the camera people, the lighting guy, the sound guy, the distributors, the clerk at the record store, the extras, the theaters, etc. do you think there would be a loss of jobs?
3. after years of research and sacrifice, Z comes up with an OS that's superior to windows, mac, linux, everything! he has intentions of selling it at a very reasonable $100. but someone gets a hold of it, and distributes it on the net as freeware. Z argues to the courts that he's the creator and he's losing millions in revenue. the courts agree that he's the owner, but tell him that in terms of revenue, it's just propaganda bs, and he's got no stats to prove real revenue loss.
do you feel that the benefit gained by so many (at the expense of Z) was ok? what if Z was a close friend of yours?
i apologize for the extra long post. the questions were mostly rhetoric in nature, so you don't need to waste your time answering them. it was just food for thought. i just believe that some of the statements being made are because we cannot place a face to who we are affecting, we don't have someone close who this directly relates to.
while i agree and share your actions, i believe we disagree with the reasoning behind those actions. heck, i'm in a no-win situation! despite all the cr*p i just wrote, i still d/l all kinds of stuff! so please don't take this post as a holier-than-thou stance.
i d/l because (for now) there's a low percentage of getting caught and because i don't have anyone that i can see it personally affecting. if either situation were to ever change, i think my actions would change as well. how about you guys?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JALALJoined: 26 Dec 2003 Total posts: 187 Location: Sweden Age: 21 Gender: Male |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adJoined: 10 Mar 2004 Total posts: 89 Location: LA Gender: Male |
| Posted: Fri May 28, 2004 4:53 am Post subject: Post Rating: 0 |
|
|
jholic,
I had no animosity toward you, either. I never attacked you, only your ideas. I am willing to continue discussion as long as we don't try to appeal to absolute moral values. Because where dogma begins constructive discussions usually end.
| jholic wrote: | don't worry, i don't believe i'm any more affected by propoganda than either of you are. no matter how you look at it, everyone has been affected by media/propaganda/whatever in some way. i just think our life experiences have been different, and therefore, we have differing views on certain situations.
|
Different life experiences surely make people view things differently. But they don't change the perception of facts, only the attitude towards them.
I do not believe you were affected by propaganda. I just think you base your analysis on emotions but not on the facts. I also think that you are trying to make conclusions looking at a static picture, at the thing how they are now. And you are assuming that how they should always be.
Also I could figure out from your last post what you were trying to say. You gave many examples but failed to articulate your conclusions.
| jholic wrote: | | ad wrote: | Some people, however, believe that there are absolute''moral" values, defined by the Bible, Coran, Adolf Hitler or George W. Bush. You can't argue with those people, all you can do is turn away and run, run, run....
PS By the way, what did the Bible say about copyright infrigment? What? there's no word copyright there? |
i respect the views/laws of other countries, but i try to concentrate on our own. many people are quick to point out some great laws of countries overseas. but what if we took ALL the laws of that other country? hm, not as quick.
|
Ok, what's the point here? You don't have your own feeling of what's right and what's wrong? You need law to tell you that? If they pass a law ordering to kill Jews you will follow without hesitation, huh?
I never said "LAWS" i said 'values". Moral values govern human behaviour. Laws are just written down procedures of implementing socially acceptible behaviour. When a law does not reflect modern moral values it gets repealled or just stop being enforeced.
If you moral values are defined by the current laws of the state of Hawaii then go to the libray memorize them all and follow them strictly. I suggest you take your computer to the police station and admit your wrongdoings , not reporting a crime is a crime also. End of story, nothing to discuss here.
| jholic wrote: |
your agent tells you that the song/movie/whatever (that you helped on) is top of the charts!! but revenue from cd/dvd/boxofc sales is just kinda average (most of it going to the people that sign your paycheck). great news is that its the number one most downloaded thing on the net!
do you feel your views about d/ling would change? do you feel other d/lers, placed in that situation, would feel the same as you?
|
How would i feel? i don't let my feelings interfere with my analysis of data ( sociological data in our case).
| jholic wrote: |
2. your utopia of the internet comes true! media is now open-source. it is completely legal to dl/trade/etc off the net.
how would entertainment workers make money?
|
How did they make money before the invention of the phonograph? In the middle ages, new songs written by bards were not protected by copyright, how did they make money?
Short answer: Performances.
| jholic wrote: |
(i don't mean just the actors/actresses/ceo/producers) why would writers write? singers sing? how about the camera people, the lighting guy, the sound guy, the distributors, the clerk at the record store, the extras, the theaters, etc. do you think there would be a loss of jobs?
|
Right, they’ve got a God-given right to have the same job forever. None of them have ever been laid off. That ‘s entertainment industry we are talking about.
| jholic wrote: |
3. after years of research and sacrifice, Z comes up with an OS that's superior to windows, mac, linux, everything! he has intentions of selling it at a very reasonable $100. but someone gets a hold of it, and distributes it on the net as freeware.
|
My old roomie works for Mysql. They produce a very popular free as in beer open source database software. The company gives away software for free but sells support. Also if you need a new special feature they’ll add it for you for a chunk of cash. Guess what, they make enough money.
| jholic wrote: |
i apologize for the extra long post. the questions were mostly rhetoric in nature, so you don't need to waste your time answering them. it was just food for thought.
|
Why don’t you present your conclusions.
| jholic wrote: |
i just believe that some of the statements being made are because we cannot place a face to who we are affecting, we don't have someone close who this directly relates to.
|
As I said before you cannot keep everybody happy.
| jholic wrote: |
while i agree and share your actions, i believe we disagree with the reasoning behind those actions. heck, i'm in a no-win situation! despite all the cr*p i just wrote, i still d/l all kinds of stuff! so please don't take this post as a holier-than-thou stance.
|
You are definitely confused. There is some ambivalence in your actions. If you have problems sleeping at night I suggest counseling. Good sleep is the most important thing.
| jholic wrote: |
how about you guys? |
I sleep well, no nightmares.
PS Don’t take my last words as an insult.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jholicJoined: 03 Feb 2004 Total posts: 6153 Location: missin' hawaii Gender: Male |
| Posted: Sun May 30, 2004 12:13 am Post subject: Post Rating: 0 |
|
|
ad: i find it ironic that you should accuse me of using emotion. it would be foolhardy of me to appeal to your emotions. since i don't harbor a guilt-trip myself, why would i expect you to? i included possibilities that could occur, and asked if you felt this would be FAIR. just present your honest answer to the situation.
my subsequent posts have not addressed much of your replies. why? although i do not share all of his views, BT-Slut backs much of his views with information and insight; you do not. many of your replies have been simplistic answers to skirt the question. yet, despite what little evidence you present (other than a vague observation), i still take the time to actually read your post.
Example:
| ad wrote: | "Performances?"
"None of them have ever been laid off??" |
did you actually read what you posted??
show of hands - who here goes to the movies? quite a few. who here would still go to the movies if you could LEGALLY d/l the movie for free off of the internet??
the avg budget for movies are nowadays near $100M+. do you think they can justify that by singing like a bard? entertainment industry people do not get laid off?? if your "dl anything off the internet legally" world ever came true, we'd all be watching LOTR with midgets and a C budget.
in not so many words, you pretty much said that entertainers should put on live performances to make money. if they go into the studio to make cd quality material, it would be volunteer work, and for your free enjoyment? wow. and your moral values reflect the MAJORITY of our society?
| ad wrote: | Ok, what's the point here? You don't have your own feeling of what's right and what's wrong? You need law to tell you that? If they pass a law ordering to kill Jews you will follow without hesitation, huh?
I never said "LAWS" i said 'values". Moral values govern human behaviour. Laws are just written down procedures of implementing socially acceptible behaviour. When a law does not reflect modern moral values it gets repealled or just stop being enforeced. |
ok, so basically, in your society, people would follow their values. they would follow laws only as long as it fits their values. (that's pretty much what you're doing.)
see, you have a problem when you point out values. how did you learn your values? from parents and teachers. how did they learn their values? etc. you could be born with the inate sense that killing is wrong. your brother may not have been born with that value. yet, most of society believes that killing is wrong. coincidence? no. basically, values stem generally from laws. laws can shape values and they are handed down generation to generation. what you are saying is that if we had no law about killing, there would be no killing in the streets. that's bs. you and i can argue forever about which came first, the chicken or the egg, but values and laws are equally important.
your view is that duplicating and freely distributing someone else's hard work and ideas is "socially acceptable behavior" and reflects our current "modern moral values"? what would happen if someone didn't share your values? oh, i remember, "majority rules."
you keep telling me that i have an unwavering sense of right and wrong, but if you actually read my posts, it's quite obvious that i do not. like all human beings, i know that laws are not perfect and i also know that people do not share the same values. however, there is one moral value that i feel should never be changed: it should never be legal to duplicate or distribute an individual's work and ideas w/o due compensation to him/her.
let me go back to one of your earlier posts:
| ad wrote: | | But if the majority of the population thinks that downloading music and movies is normal the laws will have to change of way of another. You can't outlaw the majority, usually it leads to revolutions. |
you're assuming that the majority of the population does this? the latest population figure of the US is near 300M. if i'm generous, by taking the likely demographics of p2p users at ages 15-35, i reach about 100M. to say that 100% of this age group uses p2p is ludicrous. do you really think that 150M in the US, or 3.3B people across the world use p2p?? therefore, ad, you are very, very much in the minority. do you still think that majority rules? need more convincing? you were kind enough to continually supply me with ample contradictory statements:
| ad wrote: | | For example, slavery was "right" in the US 150 years ago, and "wrong" now. Divorce was not allowed in Europe some 600 years but ok now. |
tell me, were blacks the majority or the minority at the time? did you look up the divorce rate in europe? are the majority of people getting divorced??
you even mention your roommate's work at mysql. could you provide me with a copy of his special features program (the one he charges for, not the freeware)? i can get someone to hack it, and post it on the net for free. i know that you feel this is "socially acceptable behavior" and demonstrates our "modern moral values", but could you do me a favor and ask your roommate if he feels the same?
the majority should not always rule. to you, p2p has become socially acceptable because everyone you know is doing it. but you need to realize that, as popular as you may be, not everyone in the POPULATION agrees this is acceptable behavior.
let me close with this. if the statements had been anything similar to:
"hey, it's free and easy."
"hopefully, by distributing this stuff, it'll teach those corporations to lower the prices on their software."
"i ain't paying $25 a dvd when they're probably making a 1000% profit margin on it!"
"hey, money is tight - let's help each other out and keep it on the downlow."
"i can't get this kind of stuff by any reasonable method in my area."
etc.
... i probably would have said MOVE OVER and HAND ME A SIGN!! i agree with a lot of those types of statements. those are honest answers. prices are way too high on many of these things.
but some statements were more along the lines of:
"hey, it's my RIGHT to do this."
"or they should change the law to make it my right to do this."
"everybody's doing this, so they should change the law to make it ok!"
"i'm not hurting anyone by doing this."
these are statements that i do not agree with. and i've given my reasons why i do not agree with them.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lordruinJoined: 05 May 2004 Total posts: 16 Location: england Gender: Unknown |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
|
(and I did read it all 
)
And there is no way in hell that I or anybody else with a brain would pay for something like acrobat, even if we had the money that is 
