The case FOR Pirate DVD's...

mr-modern-life said:
As for TV and copying. (I speak from a UK pov). It is never acceptable from a legal POV to copy a DVD or CD for personnal use. It is also not permisable under (c) laws to screen to an audiance (which I believe is over 5) and it wasnt (although I'm unsure how this stands now) legal to copy or record from TV and keep that on tape/disk for longer than 24 hours. Up to a few years ago it was considered a breach of law to copy a cd that you own even if you keep that yourself.
Click to expand...
Dude...that sucks.
Here in the states
1) Noone really gives a rat's ass if you show more than 5 people a dvd as long as it's on your own propery (and don't charge them to see it). Seriously, even if it is a rule, nobody cares.
2) We can record anything we see on TV or radio for pretty much unlimited personal use (so long as we don't resell it). You could record a season of a show off tv, edit out the commercials, and burn the season to dvd. So long as you are subscribed to the channel that airs the show, no one can touch you.
3) We can make unlimited "back-ups" of anything we have rights to, CDs or DVDs. I know people who've taken their CD collections, burnt copies of them all, and kept 1 copy at their house and 1 copy in their car. Doesn't matter because they paid for the song 'rights' for personal use when they bought the CD. Same applies with ripping your CD collection to your mp3 player.
 
You forget up until 5 or 6 years ago the UK still banned filsm liek Texas Chainsaw, Driller Killer and other quote 'video nasties'. Now I agree than Cannibal Ferox and Zombie 4 should be banned but for reasons of wuality and taste not gore. Even Oscar winner The Exorcist was banned for over 20 years (on home video at least).

But again ask any film fan (horror at least) in the UK and they owned or watched pirate copies of these films.
 
Lilith said:
Perhaps I am wrong, but it is my understanding that if I copy a dvd for personal use only and do not profit from it or publicly distribute it, I am breaking no law.
Click to expand...

<RANT>
Thanks to a new law called the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA), this act is now illegal here in the USA. The DMCA is an addon to existing copyright law that states unauthorized 'copying, for personal or commercial use, without profit; or personal backup of protected digital content' is illegal.

That's right. The DMCA disallows you to backup your own legally purchased protected digital content. It's sad. I can't make a backup of something I legally purchased to protect the master copy from damage (Yes, I have kids who love to get into my stuff and DESTROY IT).

The DMCA is the brainchild of the RIAA and MPAA to protect it from piracy.

The big problem I see here is that DVD, for all it's current uselessness now that a large chunk of us have HDTV sets, made standard definition video perfect. I think the industry killed itself with making DVD available: Sell and distribute perfect digital copies of its films and hope no one copies them. SILLY! If they didn't want high quality digital copies of its films to be made available for free on the web by pirates, they shouldn't have released the DVD format to them in the first place.

I think the industry that's trying to protect itself is the exact same industry that's killing itself.

Next, home HD content will be coming soon. Nice. I'd like to see either a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD format that truly is protected, perhaps by using a MASSIVE encryption key, like a 1024 or 2048-bit cypher that would take years of brute-force attacks by a supercomputer to crack. Then the **AA would have the right to whine that everyone is pirating their content. They just need to put in some effort to stop it from happening before they start suing children and dead people.
</RANT>

Sorry for the long rant, but I think big business (Disney, et. al; **AA) who want copyright reform are the same people that's going to DESTROY copyright altogether.

David Bowie said something to the effect of 'in a few years, copyright will not exist as we know it today. It needs to be thrown out the window and we need to start all over again.'

I agree with this comment. Should we take a step back and evaluate how copyright has evolved into over the last 100 years? The founding fathers created copyright to last 14 YEARS. Now, thanks to Disney, it's 100 years. And when that 100 years is over and Mickey Mouse goes into the public domain, Disney will make sure that copyright law gets extended to 150 years. Anything for the almighty buck.

That sickens me. The industry that's trying so hard to protect itself from going downhill is the same industry that's doing it to themselves.
 
Well said. Thats why this Section 8 deal with simaltanious release is the next big thing. Okay so it may cost more but it will enable people like me to watch films at home when they are first released at a reasonable price how I want to watch them WHEN I want to watch them.

Lets hope the idea flies!
 
Interesting thread. I will agree that the movie going experience has declined in quality over the last two decades. The "world is my living room" and not a theatre where other people have paid to watch a film without distractions is the biggest reason. I don't go to see movies on opening weekend. Too many teens chatting and taking cellphone calls. Being a freelance cinematographer, I have big blocks of free time, so I go to weekday matinees in LA (I know many folks around the US and other countries don't have that option plus day jobs) and avoid rowdy crowds. My advice is complain long and hard to theatre owners.

Crappy Movies: Yes, there are plenty of them. Do your research and avoid them. As I get older I realize that movies are cyclical, in that plots seemed to be recycled every 20 years or so and repackaged with the latest hot star. (Two Cases in point: "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" 1956, remade in 1978 and the had the plot borrowed for 1998 Rodriguez's "The Faculty". The hot rod movies of the late 50s & 60s, now "The Fast and the Furious") I don't go and see as many movies as I used to simply because I've seen them before. I tend to see more indie movies.

Pirating: I just don't support it. I have never downloaded a film, bought a pirate DVD or even music. Yes, many studio execs and stars are lining their pockets, but I believe in the trickle down theory, in that if studios are losing money on big movies then they'll be less money for smaller movies. Most of the studios have indie arms like Sony Classics or Fox Searchlight, etc.... and they are affected by loss of revenues. Also, as I get older, I just don't need to see a movie as soon as it's available.

My two cents.

Scott
 
Last edited:
mr-modern-life said:
1. Have you ever copied a tape, LP. CD or MP3 that you didn't purchase?
Click to expand...

I have never willingly copied a CD or downloaded an mp3 that I did not purchase (save for legal free downloads from Download.com or other sites for indie artists like Soundclick or My Space which allow the artists to make available thier songs under a creative commons license). I have had copied CDs given to me, and you can consider this hypocritical if you like. Like clive, I have felt the pangs of guilt about copied music that I have kept in the past.

My problem with this idea of supporting or allowing piarcy for the sake of a better product or better venue to view said product is that it is against the law - like MikeyD said we need better laws, but right now this is what we got and I am guilty of breaking these laws by possessing copied music - thus I should accept it if I was to be thrown in jail or made to pay a fine for soing so.

By the way, I don't consider copying your own CDs that you've legally purchased to be against the law. I am unfamiliar with the legislation that mrde50 brought up, I need to research that more before I can further elaborate this point.

mr-modern-life said:
2. Have you ever recorded a film or TV show to keep of Satalite, Cable or TV?
Click to expand...

Yes, but as clive explained money is paid for the distribution and I pay my cable bill. In the US it is not against the law in any way.

mr-modern-life said:
3. Have you ever watched DVD in a group of 4 or 5?
Click to expand...

Yes, but agian, not against the law. As long as I don't take money at the door, I am not breaking any laws.

Poke
 
A tad bit off-topic, but it has to do with piracy...
Is it just me, or are music rights way over priced. Like on Napster, they charge $.99 per song. They equate stealing music to stealing cars and purses (the US RIAA does anyway). Yet, when you steal cars, purses, etc. they aren't there anymore. Digital media is an unlimited resource, infinite in quantity. It's rediculous.
 
Ok, I use this argument a lot when discussing music rights:
When I was 16, I only listened to a few bands and mainly classical. My best friend Bill burnt me a mix CD of downloaded tunes, amung which was a band called "Matthew Good Band" (song: Apparitions).
I now own every single albumn by Mr. Good, and have seen over 13 shows since discovering this artist.
Same thing with Zepplin, the Stones, The Killers, Third Eye Blind, Concrete Blonde, etc. (minus the concerts because half those bands are partially dead or don't tour in Canada)

So in essence, the "0.99" cents the music industry lost per song I downloaded was recouped in albumn and concert sales. Also, the artists get a new fan.

I've only downloaded a few films, and most of the time it had to do with concent being censored in north american markets (Battle Royale for example). Others were released a year before north american markets in Europe and Asia.

But here's my question- how are downloads considered profits? In essence, p2p software is just file sharing from one computer to another... kind of like making a copy of a DVD for yourself and lending it to a friend for free... so where's the harm? Is this about "potential monies lost"??

I bring this up because it ties in with Lilith's comment: "If you don't get the audience reaction you expected, it's not the audience, it's the way you delivered the message.".

Since there is no major outlet for downloading feature films, how can an industry complain about potential losses when they do not even use that medium as of yet?

It's like me saying that too much wood is being burned for campfires and it's enviromentally harmful, but not providing an alternate solution except to sue every camper who makes a fire!!!

Either way, I firmly believe it is up to the industry to provide more incentive to go to cinemas and buy DVDs- whether it be bonus features exclusive to certain mediums, or whatnot.

When Serjus mentioned: "Digital media is an unlimited resource, infinite in quantity. It's rediculous.", it made quite a bit of sense- in essence, no one is ACTUALLY losing money. The industry is just claiming the people who downloaded these movies are stealing because they did not pay for a ticket... Am I wrong or am I wrong?
(prove me wrong)
 
Another point I just though of:

What about used music/movie shops that sell DVDs for profit at reduced costs?

Isn't that selling a film for profit?

And if that's legal, then wouldn't it be legal for someone to buy a film, burn a copy, re-sell it, that buyer burns a copy and resells it, etc, etc, etc?

Technically it would be.. so hows about them beans?
 
Spatula said:
Another point I just though of:

What about used music/movie shops that sell DVDs for profit at reduced costs?

Isn't that selling a film for profit?

And if that's legal, then wouldn't it be legal for someone to buy a film, burn a copy, re-sell it, that buyer burns a copy and resells it, etc, etc, etc?

Technically it would be.. so hows about them beans?
Click to expand...

No, you're creating a sellable entity from a source of which you do not own the rights to. In the case of used CD sales, once the seller sells the CD or DVD, they no longer have that to sell and so they must buy another if they want to sell more, which in the end puts money back into the pocket of the original purchaser of the DVD so they might buy another to take its place, further continuing the cycle, and supporting the industry. Further, those who may not have the cash to buy new DVD's to discover artists may buy used and then eventually start attending those artist's concerts or buying their merchandise or even new CD's or DVD's once they've discovered them.
 
See there is another issue here that sometimes drives people to piracy.

The issue here is also my cinema chain which hasn't shown films I want to see. Transporter 2, Unleashed, History Of Violence, Saw 2... they all missed my cinema. Instead I get Herbie on 3 screens.

No I am unable to pay to see these movies when they come out due to where I live and the cinema. So is it then morally right to buy a pirate DVD IF I intend on rerenting or buying it when it comes out proper.

Technically I can't pay to see it so what do I do?
 
I've been thinking about this for a few days and the truth is that I really don't care if everyday punters pirate the occassional DVD. I don't see it as something worth worrying too much about. Home taping hasn't killed the music industry, and although P2P is hurting them, I don't see many execs living on the streets.

However, what I do have a problem is with an indie film maker doing it. It basically comes down to this, as a film maker I expect the distributor to pay me to distribute my film and would sue his/her ass if they distributed it without paying me. I don't think it's playing the game to then screw the distributors by publically condoning pirating. It's like selling computer games to Woolworths and then suggesting that everyone shoplifts them.

As to your local cinema, I suggest writing to them about their booking policy. If they get twenty or thirty letters from people all complaining about the lack of choice they will rethink their programming. I have to drive forty minutes to get to my nearest multiplex, maybe you should look for a better cinema. You live in Sussex, I don't believe for second there isn't a choice of cinemas. I've got maybe six ten screen mulitplexes withing forty minutes drive and they all programme differently. Plus three great arthouse venues. I live in the North East where we've only just got inside toilets and electricity, so I know that you southerners must have it better.

The other way of looking at it is if there is a gap in the market in your area for a cinema that programmes better films, maybe you should consider going into the cinema business. A few of us have talked about setting up indie cinemas over the years, the margins are tough, but it beats complaining.
 
Cinema's are quite expensive and very low profit. My dad considered putting a 10 screen in our hometown. Would have cost several million to construct and making it all back takes several years. Not an ideal business venture for someone looking for great money.
 
clive said:
However, what I do have a problem is with an indie film maker doing it. It basically comes down to this, as a film maker I expect the distributor to pay me to distribute my film and would sue his/her ass if they distributed it without paying me. I don't think it's playing the game to then screw the distributors by publically condoning pirating. It's like selling computer games to Woolworths and then suggesting that everyone shoplifts them.
Click to expand...

What I should have said before is that I would NEVER pirate an Indie film makers DVD out of repect. My morals may be dubious but everything i have said applies to hollywiood and mainstream only.

That's kinda of a double standard but again I dont mind Hollywood studio types loosing money (and lets not forget they are the main loosers of mainstream piracy WHATEVER anyone says or thinks. How do I know this - well technician wages on films have never been higher in the UK, so high that they are pricing themselves out of the market but thats a different arguement) but knwoing that I'm taking money out of Clive's pocket.

That I wouldn't do because I know how that effects us/you/them.
 
If you have problems with the current structure, you can start a petition and present it to the appropriate gov't agencies. If you instead turn to crime to try to prove a point, expect to get caught...especially if you're saying your a criminal in a publically accessible forum.

I don't believe in the way the economy works, so I'm going to go rob a bank. This is a much more obvious example of an action being illegal. Yes, the example is extreme, but I'll prove my point by breaking the law. Speaking morally, the two crimes are the same. Morality doesn't know extremes, it's black and white.

Stealing a DVD is the same as stealing a car...their manufacturing costs scale accordingly. In digital, it's not materials that cost money, but hosting, content and bandwidth. How much hardware is dedicated to iTunes Music store to handle the 1 billion song downloads they've had so far? Between that and the cost for the content, apple is probably just above breaking even on ITMS.

Above and beyond that, the big studios have to promote their content (designers making posters and tv spots, air time and wall space for all of that costs money) and pay their bills as well. The content doesn't just magically appear out the 'net, it is made by large armies of people with families that need to get fed and bills that need to be paid.

As I wrap up production on my feature, I have come to respect every completed film no matter how crappy I think it is. Getting to the finish line is a massive undertaking, much larger than I had ever though about before. I am currently doing it with volunteer cast/crew, but they all have day jobs, if this was their day job, they would expect to get paid...I would have to get the movie to make a profit to be able to do that. As Indies, we have the luxury of claiming moral issues with the established cinema industry and claiming that the content should be free and that piracy isn't that big of a deal.

So did metallica, until their families started depending on the income from their music.

Bottom line, piracy is illegal, if you don't think it should be, get enough people to complain about it to the government. These are the people responsible for amending the laws to suit the needs of ALL the parties involved on both sides of the equation.
 
knightly said:
If you have problems with the current structure, you can start a petition and present it to the appropriate gov't agencies. If you instead turn to crime to try to prove a point, expect to get caught...especially if you're saying your a criminal in a publically accessible forum.
Click to expand...

<::content removed by moderator::> Goverements dont care.

knightly said:
Stealing a DVD is the same as stealing a car...their manufacturing costs scale accordingly. In digital, it's not materials that cost money, but hosting, content and bandwidth. How much hardware is dedicated to iTunes Music store to handle the 1 billion song downloads they've had so far? Between that and the cost for the content, apple is probably just above breaking even on ITMS..
Click to expand...

Not in law. Look at the different scales of punishment. TOTALLY different.

knightly said:
Above and beyond that, the big studios have to promote their content (designers making posters and tv spots, air time and wall space for all of that costs money) and pay their bills as well. The content doesn't just magically appear out the 'net, it is made by large armies of people with families that need to get fed and bills that need to be paid.
Click to expand...

They are all paid. Trust me. As I have stated before up and down the line on major studio films they pay is better than what I earn in a week for a day. That goes across teh board. Simple. The only people who loose out is shareholders and studio execs. This bullshite that piracy funds terrorism, that it will kill the film indutry etc is just that. Believe what you want but piracy has been going on for years and will continue to.

<Post edited by moderator>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
EVERYONE PLEASE... Does anyone else here think this thread is getting a bit out of hand? It started as a moral question (That's how I took it) to outright attacks on neighboring countries, governments and their people.

Yes, we all agree that there are laws that prohibit illegal copying of copyrighted material with and without profit. Whether it is moral or not is up the the individual.

Personally, my Karma is excellent.
 
mrde50 said:
Thanks to a new law called the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA), this act is now illegal here in the USA. The DMCA is an addon to existing copyright law that states unauthorized 'copying, for personal or commercial use, without profit; or personal backup of protected digital content' is illegal.
Click to expand...

Actually, what is illegal is using a device to break the copyright encryption. And since DVDs (and soon CDs) have copy protection, there is no way to legally copy them for fair use. So that puts us in a weird place, because we have the right under fair use to make the copies, but if we break the copy protection, we are breaking the law.

Here's a good article about it.

I'm back on forth on this issue. I guess I don't really mind unless it's happening on a mass level or being sold for profit.

mr-modern-life said:
Now compare that to buying a pirate copy. I can get the DVD for £5, sit at home with my LCD TV, surround sound system where I can actually HEAR the film, have a comfortable, warm room to watch it in, no adverts and no idiot talking all the way through it behind me.
Click to expand...

What I don't get is, if you're going to BUY a pirated DVD, why not and just wait to get a legal disc when it is released? You're spending money anyway, plus, your arguements seem to support more along the lines of - stay at home and watch DVDs, screw the crappy cinemas - vs. - long live pirated DVDs- I guess I don't get how pirated DVDs plays into the comfort of watching DVDs at home. And if you're paying for it, someone's getting your money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top