The Shrine

Damn pirate! =P

http://wii.ign.com/articles/764/764732p1.html

The Seeker wrote:Damn pirate! =P

http://wii.ign.com/articles/764/764732p1.html

That's funny...they can't get their way and go crying to the US government.

Our ISPs don't release their customer information to these bullies. The Canadian goverment (well, at least the previous one) recognized the idiocy of MPAA and RIIA (and sure, maybe the ESA) tactics and direction. Boo-hoo. We also have multiple, artist-organized lobby groups that support digital distribution (*gasp* support the artist, especially in marginalized canadian media).

It's kinda funny to see the growing pains of digital expansion mixed in with the desperate grasp on control and distribution rights these eventual dinosaurs are attempting.

Americans trying to bully their way to control everything as normal.

Unfortunately, with Bushper there, they may have a chance to gain that control

I'm a bit confused as to why you all are so quick to defend piracy.

I mean, it's a fact of life, and it won't put entertainers completely out of business, but it's a highly self-serving attitude.

This bill sounds stupid, but the principle of not pirating things just because you can is still a valid one...

I think the prices of a dollar for a song, 5-10 dollars for old games, and DVD prices (ranging from 2-30) dollars for the most part are very very fair. I can't see a good defense for piracy. New games are fairly cheap too for the most part, 35-59 dollars Canadian is NOT much for a game like Zelda, Xenosaga, FF Advance, and such.

Nev wrote:I'm a bit confused as to why you all are so quick to defend piracy.

I mean, it's a fact of life, and it won't put entertainers completely out of business, but it's a highly self-serving attitude.

This bill sounds stupid, but the principle of not pirating things just because you can is still a valid one...

Really, this whole "piracy is costing us billions of dollars" argument is a load of Seeker-talk. Do you honestly think that each person who pirates something would actually have paid the full MSRP on that item to begin with? That is, after all, how the "impact" is measured.

I just download Ghost Rider. Why? I would never pay to see it, even on a whim on a cheap night. Just don't seem worth it to me. So, did the movie industry actually lose my $6 to $10? Nope, they've lost nothing.

The year Napster was first huge, the music industry saw a jump of 20% in sales (I think it was 1997). Did they get hurt by Napster? Not according to the figures. If anything, there's an argument to be made that it helped them.

And that's the other big thing with me. These lobby groups are so loud about the negatives of piracy yet there's no positives mentioned...ever...by anyone. Does anyone mention the fact that I downloaded Resident Evil 'cause i was unsure, loved it, then went out and saw it in the theatre and bought the DVD? The movie industry gained about $30 from me 'cause I downloaded it. With Ghost Rider, I may be proven wrong and the film might rule and I may go see it in the theatere or buy the DVD. If not, they've lost nothing 'cause I wasn't going to spend the coin on the film anyways. Heck, there would be NO Naruto market in North America if it weren't for "piracy". And that's a pretty big money maker right now.

Same thing with the music industry. There was an argument to be made that there was a decent positive impact of the piracy as people would hear a song from a band then go buy the album if they liked it.

Of course, I don't expect most people to be like me and actually buy stuff they like. There are people like one of my friends who only pirate and rarely spend the money even if they like something. Would they spend the money anyways? That's debatable. And also, Napster saw a 40+% decrease in sales the year after the 20% increase, so there are some long term effects there too.

But, that drop in the sales forced the music industry to change its practice. Look at the sales of legit mp3 downloads. They're huge. They're like that 'cause piracy is only worth it to most people if the costs are high. And those "most" are likely the ones to be purchasing to begin with. So, when an mp3 download is $1, it's so cheap it's not worth it to pirate. The end result is the consumer now has choice to get the songs they want rather than having to pay for the songs they don't. Bonus to the consumer, hit to the industry that was raping the consumer and its entertainers for years. This is a bad thing?

The same shift is happening with the movie industry. With the internet finally getting to the point where streaming is a real option, you're getting downloads on demand starting to take off. Downloading stuff on the 360 or the cable box or other PPV stuff, both movies and TV, is in its infancy and just starting to take off. Starting to become more and more popular along with DVD sales, which are huge. Again, worth the money, not worth the d'load.

So, if you take the fact that these lobby groups are vastly over-estimating the economic impact by a) overpricing the product (who the heck pays MSRP anywhere anymore?) and b) overestimating the number of people who would actually buy if piracy were not an option and couple that with the complete lack of taking into account the positives of piracy, and you'll find that piracy isn't nearly as big an issue (in NA at least) as the lobby groups are trying to make you think it is.

And right now, I'm in the middle of making a game for the XBLA. If people were to rip it off on the PC and play it (which is likely if it's popular at all), it would actually be a bonus to me. I'd rather have the first iteration of that game be played by as many people as possible. The benefits in the future would outweigh the losses now. Look how many people played Tetris on the PC on a ripped version. Don't tell me that didn't have a positive effect on the sales of future iterations of the game due to the increase in value of the Tetris name....

Have you not been paying attention to the amount of record stores going out of business? Either way, I don't agree with your logic. That is like justifying getting on a plane, a train, or a bus, and saying it is fine because you wouldn't have even taken the trip in the first place if you had to pay. Sneaking into clubs, and just about any type of similar service is the same.

As far as the music industry goes, it is a 23% shrink between 2000 and 2006 (41% in Canada), Summer or Fall 1999 is when Napster came out, so if sales grew in 1997, that was two years prior. The thing is, the media industry overall has been seeing tremendous growth (6.6% per year) while the music portion of it is shrinking. Had people been forced to pay, it is probably the music industry would be leading the pack since it is a cheap portion of the music industry.

Even at a dollar, Itunes has only sold 2 billion songs since it was launched in 2003, whereas an estimated 1 billion songs are shared, without paying for them, per month.


http://www.pwc.com/extweb/ncpressreleas ... 94004DDD0A
http://www.riaa.com/issues/piracy/default.asp
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/03/20/080011.php


How many CDs have you bought this decade compared to the 90's?

Keep telling yourself whatever you want to believe, Zeus, but I'm not reading that fucking essay.

Nev wrote:Keep telling yourself whatever you want to believe, Zeus, but I'm not reading that fucking essay.

I dont know why you argue/debate/converse with people when you refuse to hear their side. Does, "LALALALALAAAAAAA" *fingers in ears*, "I'm not LISTENING." really work?

I suppose you could throw a temper tantrum and stalk off, too, if you want to stay 8 years old forever.

No, I just don't feel like getting into a huge fight about it. I don't feel like reading four paragraphs of response and picking apart debate points when my "side" of the "argument" is two sentences long.

This place doesn't follow a formal debate style, in case you've noticed, Flop...I mean, Flip.

Nev wrote:Keep telling yourself whatever you want to believe, Zeus, but I'm not reading that fucking essay.

heh, fair enough. We'll just both continue on believing what we believe, then :-)

It seems pointless, to me, is all. Guys, the sky is green, but i refuse to look up.

It is almost an insult since Zues took the time to explain his point of view... a point of view that YOU requested, Nev says "I'm a bit confused as to why you all are so quick to defend piracy." Zeues responds as to why, and you chose to ignore it and continually state a non-backed up opinion.

You're right, we dont follow a formal debate style, but if you dont want to read what you asked for, then dont ask for it, and certainly dont post about how you decided to ignore it.

How many debates have we had in here where someone's really actually influenced someone else's mind on another topic? Seriously now. I want you to do some percentages and then come back and take me to task on something so piddly-small.

Why shouldn't I post about how I decided to ignore it? As I noted, this isn't a formal debate. It was not intended as disrespect towards Zeus, and hopefully he hasn't taken it as such. Would it be better to be honest in the way I have been, or let the thread die of obscurity like every other time we've had the piracy debate, until someone gets their hackles up and raises the issue again?

This isn't all that important, Flip. None of us have an inside ear with anyone at the RIAA/ESA/whatever, as far as I know. And I wasn't particularly planning on writing my senator about it...you may feel free to do so if you like.

And even if you choose to see my response to Zeus as an insult...remember, even if it had been, it wasn't directed at you.

No problem, it isnt a debate.

So, why start a conversation if you dont want to read it? If you didnt care, then id prefer youd do nothing.

Maybe i'm confused, i thought this was a forum board? Where you post to things you find interesting and hope to get good responses. Not to ask questions that you decide to not read the answers to when someone takes the time to reply...

I only choose to point this out in this thread, because it has to be atleast the 4th or 5th time i've seen you post a, "Thats too long and i dont want to read it." response. Dont want to read it? Then dont. But pointing out that you wont only makes the author feel like he wasted time and makes you seem ignorant for not having the attention span to read 10 paragraphs.

So if you stop doing this, its a win-win for everyone.

Have I done this to you?

Do you see "To Flip" anywhere on the message that I posted in response to Zeus?

And if not, why are you so mad?

Im not mad at all. It just annoys me, so i figured i would try and point out why those kind of posts are useless so it doesnt happen again.

Flip, don't be a hypocrite. We know very well that you LOVE arguing on topics that you know absolutely nothing about. You do it all the time, dismissing facts because they don't agree with what you think.

I'll continue the topic. The concerns Zeus expressed, while simplistic, is one angle to argue. Personally, I find it much more complex than that - does it not bother you to know that a corporate entity holds so much sway over not only your own government, but the political pressure exerted on foriegn countries/foriegn law process? What it really amounts to is that a large portion of North America's "product" is hinged on services such as distribution, marketing, consultation and information technology...and ALL these things are essentially negated (or perhaps more importantly, 'changed') by the internet. You have dinosaurs desperately clinging to a business model which is clearly no longer compatible - from a technical standpoint, a legal one and even a competative one. At the end of the day, there actions will/could hurt everyone.

I think it would be interesting for a lot of you to examine and read up on just how duplicitous, underhanded and even illegal many of the anti-piracy methods that have been employed in recent years - I'm betting it would surprise most of you.

As for someone mentioning music sales down - that's a tricky, often oversimplified debate (especially when you pick and choose the data you look at). My personal opinion is two-fold: no exciting product and over exposure. Tatu's, Nickelback's, Sum41's, Good Charelotte's, Timberlakes and Britany's shaved snatch isn't exactly the industry's A-game, at least as far as I'm concerned. What is the last viewership for Grammy's and related broadcast shows? Down I bet. Then you get to look at the increase in radio service (satellite, internet), music TV/channels, streamed Ad-assisted content etc - it's overexposure for a lackluster product.

The above is certainly no more than my opinion - it's probably important to look at established popular artists to see if there is noticable drop in sales. I don't think there has been. Radio has been around forever - and recording to make your own mix tape is nothing new. I'm sorry, but if people are going to claim all music fans are suddenly audiophiles, where copy quality dictates purchase habits and internet copying explains a drop in sales - I'm calling bullshit, from a purely commonsense standpoint.

As for me personally, I've bought more CDs than I have in years, lately. Mind you, they were mostly gifts (Buddah Bar volumes, massive attack, etc). For myself, aside from Coldplay and Morrissey's last CD, I haven't bought anything since the 90's...I haven't downloaded anything either.

kali o. wrote: Personally, I find it much more complex than that - does it not bother you to know that a corporate entity holds so much sway over not only your own government, but the political pressure exerted on foriegn countries/foriegn law process?

For perhaps the first time in his entire life, Kali O makes a good point. Much of the distribution if "Intellectual Property" (software, music, books, etc) hinges on private entities being able to to either *change* laws to fit their needs (See <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mickey_Mou ... ct">Disney and the Mickey Mouse Protection Act</a> which damn near removes the possibility for anything entering the public domain). Look at the DMCA. These are all examples of big business changing laws to protect their own interests.

Of course, this isn't anything new in American politics. However, there's no outcry against this kind of thing, so corporations get away with it.

You mentioned radio. One huge reason ratings are down is because people can create their on selections via iPOD or burning CDS. They don't have to listen to corporate pushed payola crap on the radio. Technology has freed people from the normal distribution channels (radio, tv, etc) that have traditionally been controlled by a few large corporations.

The Seeker wrote:Flip, don't be a hypocrite. We know very well that you LOVE arguing on topics that you know absolutely nothing about. You do it all the time, dismissing facts because they don't agree with what you think.

Maybe i dismiss some things, we all do, but atleast i read the damn post. *shrug*

Ishamael wrote: For perhaps the first time in his entire life, Kali O makes a good point. Much of the distribution if "Intellectual Property" (software, music, books, etc) hinges on private entities being able to to either *change* laws to fit their needs (See <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mickey_Mou ... ct">Disney and the Mickey Mouse Protection Act</a> which damn near removes the possibility for anything entering the public domain).

It's a known and generally accepted fact that I am the most intelligent and well-spoken poster currently active at the shrine....

**cough**

By the way, "either" generally implies more than one. I'm not sure why your "either" ended up at a singular thought...my best guess is that in your quivering excitement of *zinging* me in your initial line, your adrenaline-laden and shaking plump digits typed at a speed far beyond the meager limits of your mind.

If you figure out what the rest of your thought was now that you have had time to calm down, I'd be genuinely interested in hearing it.

This topic of conversations has been somewhat of a love-hate issue for me. I love to read about it because I hate how fucking corrupt the whole system is in regards to Intellectual Property, Copyright, Distribution Cartels, and the whole like.

It's positively frightening how much power lobby groups such as the RIAA and MPAA have in the world right now. Yes, I meant to say world. I know they bunker up in the USA, but these douchebags are causing so much shit in so many different countries via their extended international branches, and I really don't know why any government or legal system gives them the time of day.

Oh wait, I do know... corruption. Money buys votes and God knows the distribution cartels buy 'em at wholesale. What REALLY infuriates me is how they make a mockery of any legal system that allows them to drag people through law suits over copyright violations and illegal distribution. Whats more is the hypocrisy of the "settlements" the **AAs get out of taking regular people to court over file sharing. Sure, $125,000 max for each song shared. How much did that kid of the Time Warner Exec (or CEO or whatever, cant remember) who got caught file sharing have to pay? What's that, Sony only has to pay $125 per user who they infected with their god damn ROOT KIT that ran in the background if people used the CDs in the home computer (go install a root kit on a Sony server to record information, see what kind of penalty the courts agree to for YOU)?

I know, this is a rant. Perhaps a very nonsensical rant. The bottom line is I read about this shit almost every day via news sites and slashdot (yes, slashdot must be taken with a grain of salt) and it just frustrates me that corporate assholes who can't adapt to a changing economic systems (see the internet) get laws put in place that fuck the user AND the artists, and insists on labeling every one of their potential customers as a thief (see copy protection, DRM, etc.).

Kali O. has it bang on. A lack luster product. And they know it. They keep turning out the same formula-driven shit over an over, charge more and more for it, and make it less and less accessible to the people willing to pay for it.

I don't buy CDs. I buy DVDs on occasion. If there is something out there that I want, and I can't find it in a store, or in the form I want, or that will be usable in the way I want (whether it is iPod, my DVD player, or my PC), you better bet your ass that I'll pirate it.

Anyways, I'm done. You guys can keep in-fighting now

kali o. wrote:

Ishamael wrote: For perhaps the first time in his entire life, Kali O makes a good point. Much of the distribution if "Intellectual Property" (software, music, books, etc) hinges on private entities being able to to either *change* laws to fit their needs (See <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mickey_Mou ... ct">Disney and the Mickey Mouse Protection Act</a> which damn near removes the possibility for anything entering the public domain).

It's a known and generally accepted fact that I am the most intelligent and well-spoken poster currently active at the shrine....

**cough**

By the way, "either" generally implies more than one. I'm not sure why your "either" ended up at a singular thought...my best guess is that in your quivering excitement of *zinging* me in your initial line, your adrenaline-laden and shaking plump digits typed at a speed far beyond the meager limits of your mind.

If you figure out what the rest of your thought was now that you have had time to calm down, I'd be genuinely interested in hearing it.

I think we need a sitcom up in this beast called "That's Our Kali!"

Nev wrote:I think we need a sitcom up in this beast called "That's Our Kali!"

He'd probably just use his mad haxxor skills to edit the final product to his liking. That tech-savvy prick!

Oracle wrote:This topic of conversations has been somewhat of a love-hate issue for me. I love to read about it because I hate how fucking corrupt the whole system is in regards to Intellectual Property, Copyright, Distribution Cartels, and the whole like.

It's positively frightening how much power lobby groups such as the RIAA and MPAA have in the world right now. Yes, I meant to say world. I know they bunker up in the USA, but these douchebags are causing so much shit in so many different countries via their extended international branches, and I really don't know why any government or legal system gives them the time of day.

Oh wait, I do know... corruption. Money buys votes and God knows the distribution cartels buy 'em at wholesale. What REALLY infuriates me is how they make a mockery of any legal system that allows them to drag people through law suits over copyright violations and illegal distribution. Whats more is the hypocrisy of the "settlements" the **AAs get out of taking regular people to court over file sharing. Sure, $125,000 max for each song shared. How much did that kid of the Time Warner Exec (or CEO or whatever, cant remember) who got caught file sharing have to pay? What's that, Sony only has to pay $125 per user who they infected with their god damn ROOT KIT that ran in the background if people used the CDs in the home computer (go install a root kit on a Sony server to record information, see what kind of penalty the courts agree to for YOU)?

I know, this is a rant. Perhaps a very nonsensical rant. The bottom line is I read about this shit almost every day via news sites and slashdot (yes, slashdot must be taken with a grain of salt) and it just frustrates me that corporate assholes who can't adapt to a changing economic systems (see the internet) get laws put in place that fuck the user AND the artists, and insists on labeling every one of their potential customers as a thief (see copy protection, DRM, etc.).

Kali O. has it bang on. A lack luster product. And they know it. They keep turning out the same formula-driven shit over an over, charge more and more for it, and make it less and less accessible to the people willing to pay for it.

I don't buy CDs. I buy DVDs on occasion. If there is something out there that I want, and I can't find it in a store, or in the form I want, or that will be usable in the way I want (whether it is iPod, my DVD player, or my PC), you better bet your ass that I'll pirate it.

Anyways, I'm done. You guys can keep in-fighting now

I would actually argue that right now, movies have taken a pretty big step forward, particularly when compared to the CG 90s. There are way more indie films getting wide release, recognition, and actually making money.

It's the music industry that's completely killed itself IMO.

kali o. wrote:
It's a known and generally accepted fact that I am the most intelligent and well-spoken poster currently active at the shrine....

**cough**

By the way, "either" generally implies more than one. I'm not sure why your "either" ended up at a singular thought...my best guess is that in your quivering excitement of *zinging* me in your initial line, your adrenaline-laden and shaking plump digits typed at a speed far beyond the meager limits of your mind.

If you figure out what the rest of your thought was now that you have had time to calm down, I'd be genuinely interested in hearing it.

I do get excited when it comes to smacking my bitches! But you knew that already. (Also I was sleepy when I wrote the post and didn't feel like proofreading).

I believe I was going for something like the following:

Much of the distribution of "Intellectual Property" (software, music, books, etc) hinges on private entities being able to to either *change* laws to fit their needs (See Disney and the Mickey Mouse Protection Act which damn near removes the possibility for anything entering the public domain) or enact *new* laws such as the DMCA to protect themselves while blocking competition.

kali o. wrote:I'll continue the topic. The concerns Zeus expressed, while simplistic, is one angle to argue. Personally, I find it much more complex than that - does it not bother you to know that a corporate entity holds so much sway over not only your own government, but the political pressure exerted on foriegn countries/foriegn law process? What it really amounts to is that a large portion of North America's "product" is hinged on services such as distribution, marketing, consultation and information technology...and ALL these things are essentially negated (or perhaps more importantly, 'changed') by the internet. You have dinosaurs desperately clinging to a business model which is clearly no longer compatible - from a technical standpoint, a legal one and even a competative one. At the end of the day, there actions will/could hurt everyone.

I think it would be interesting for a lot of you to examine and read up on just how duplicitous, underhanded and even illegal many of the anti-piracy methods that have been employed in recent years - I'm betting it would surprise most of you.

As for someone mentioning music sales down - that's a tricky, often oversimplified debate (especially when you pick and choose the data you look at). My personal opinion is two-fold: no exciting product and over exposure. Tatu's, Nickelback's, Sum41's, Good Charelotte's, Timberlakes and Britany's shaved snatch isn't exactly the industry's A-game, at least as far as I'm concerned. What is the last viewership for Grammy's and related broadcast shows? Down I bet. Then you get to look at the increase in radio service (satellite, internet), music TV/channels, streamed Ad-assisted content etc - it's overexposure for a lackluster product.

The above is certainly no more than my opinion - it's probably important to look at established popular artists to see if there is noticable drop in sales. I don't think there has been. Radio has been around forever - and recording to make your own mix tape is nothing new. I'm sorry, but if people are going to claim all music fans are suddenly audiophiles, where copy quality dictates purchase habits and internet copying explains a drop in sales - I'm calling bullshit, from a purely commonsense standpoint.

As for me personally, I've bought more CDs than I have in years, lately. Mind you, they were mostly gifts (Buddah Bar volumes, massive attack, etc). For myself, aside from Coldplay and Morrissey's last CD, I haven't bought anything since the 90's...I haven't downloaded anything either.

I agree with Kali, I'll read his post later.

Black Lotus wrote:

Nev wrote:I think we need a sitcom up in this beast called "That's Our Kali!"

He'd probably just use his mad haxxor skills to edit the final product to his liking. That tech-savvy prick!

You know, I did note you making fun of me during that whole exchange...not nice! I fell for it, too, in my zealotry to be a good op.

For that, I'm crafting you an extra special vicious Shrine Award this year. It will be a doozy. You will read it, and your weak Canadi-ish mind will be utterly leveled!

The Seeker wrote:I think the prices of a dollar for a song, 5-10 dollars for old games, and DVD prices (ranging from 2-30) dollars for the most part are very very fair. I can't see a good defense for piracy. New games are fairly cheap too for the most part, 35-59 dollars Canadian is NOT much for a game like Zelda, Xenosaga, FF Advance, and such.

I disagree with music. A buck for a song ends up being about $10-12 dollars for an album without any cover art, and in a lossy music format. I think the prices in AllOfMP3 are very fair. If they manage to put out an artist donation program (to donate 5% of the sales to the artist), the artist would be making more money from AllOfMP3 than from the RIAA, and suddenly the artist would be defending the site and their prices.

SineSwiper wrote: I disagree with music. A buck for a song ends up being about $10-12 dollars for an album without any cover art, and in a lossy music format. I think the prices in AllOfMP3 are very fair. If they manage to put out an artist donation program (to donate 5% of the sales to the artist), the artist would be making more money from AllOfMP3 than from the RIAA, and suddenly the artist would be defending the site and their prices.

You get to pick and choose which songs you want rather than spending the price on the full album. If you want the art and such singles usually cost a third to half the price of the full album instead of a dollar.