So the main point is you do know full well that there are losses as a result of piracy.
As I said yesterday I never claimed that piracy can't result in a loss, just if the pirate was never going to buy the product there was no lost sale. Some people were saying there was a lost sale, I was pointing out that factual error. Nothing more nothing less. You seem to have extrapolated from this that I think piracy is a good thing, which I've never said it is.
The film industry are a right spiteful bloody lot. I see them as people who think they should have their own way on everything just because they're absolutely filthy rich. They're not willing to compromise on anything. I want it this way, I want it that way etc...
Can you imagine if other companies started using the practices that the media industry uses...
Imagine going to buy to Peugeot and buying a car, only to be told that you are only allowed to drive it on motorways, and if you want to drive around town you must pay for another car to use instead because you are not allowed to drive the first car on any road other than a motorway...
Can you imagine if other companies started using the practices that the media industry......
But this is the intellectual property law which works world wide since the Berne convention in 1886 ..... Seems to have worked for about 130 years...
And PRS has existed for over 100 years ...
Can you imagine if other companies started using the practices that the media industry uses...
Imagine going to buy to Peugeot and buying a car, only to be told that you are only allowed to drive it on motorways, and if you want to drive around town you must pay for another car to use instead because you are not allowed to drive the first car on any road other than a motorway...
I know. It's absolutely ridiculous! If people buy a DVD/Blu-Ray, they should be able to copy it to their devices. The film and music industry are getting too big for their boots. Power has gone to their heads.
I know. It's absolutely ridiculous! If people buy a DVD/Blu-Ray, they should be able to copy it to their devices. The film and music industry are getting too big for their boots. Power has gone to their heads.
Are you sitting down for this.....?
I think this is the one area that we can agree on - I do think it's a bit cheeky to expect people to buy a Blu-ray to watch on their lovely home-cinema system, then if they want to watch said film on an iPad, they have to buy a second copy.
I wonder if Bill Gates' prophecy will be true, in that Blu-ray, as a storage medium will be the last physical storage media before we go down the cloud-based/online/download only route? If it is, it's not exactly going to help stop piracy.....unless there's a way to somehow tether downloads to devices? I daresay with dynamic IP addresses, VPNs, firewalls, etc., there'll be just too many ways in which to circumvent any security measures...
I wonder if Bill Gates' prophecy will be true, in that Blu-ray, as a storage medium will be the last physical storage media before we go down the cloud-based/online/download only route?
Nah, I suspect variants and improvements on the micro SD card format will continue to evolve for quite a while yet. Bill didn't have the UK phone network to contend with. My LG G4 is patiently waiting for the 2TB card to appear so I can fill it up with legitimately acquired 4K movies
I think this is the one area that we can agree on - I do think it's a bit cheeky to expect people to buy a Blu-ray to watch on their lovely home-cinema system, then if they want to watch said film on an iPad, they have to buy a second copy.
I wonder if Bill Gates' prophecy will be true, in that Blu-ray, as a storage medium will be the last physical storage media before we go down the cloud-based/online/download only route? If it is, it's not exactly going to help stop piracy.....unless there's a way to somehow tether downloads to devices? I daresay with dynamic IP addresses, VPNs, firewalls, etc., there'll be just too many ways in which circumvent any security measures...
Quite a lot of Blu-Rays these days let you have a copy in the cloud using the UltraViolet service https://www.myuv.com/ You get a card with a code to enter with the Blu-Ray. You have to link your account to another service to stream your stuff. I use Flixter.
Very useful for watching on different devices. Tablets, phones, Roku boxes, etc.
As for Blu-Ray been the last physical storage, I'd say very possibly.
Quite a lot of Blu-Rays these days let you have a copy in the cloud using the UltraViolet service https://www.myuv.com/ You get a card with a code to enter with the Blu-Ray. You have to link your account to another service to stream your stuff. I use Flixter.
Very useful for watching on different devices. Tablets, phones, Roku boxes, etc.
As for Blu-Ray been the last physical storage, I'd say very possibly.
I used that service and the picture quality of the film wasn't as good as it should have been. As for the bit in bold, what about UHD? Unless, of course, the buying of films/series/documentaries starts being made available in download only. If that's the case, online retailers will have to provide huge bandwidth in order to cater for all those people having to buy their media through download only. If this happens, those without an internet connection will have to get one.
I used that service and the picture quality of the film wasn't as good as it should have been. As for the bit in bold, what about UHD? Unless, of course, the buying of films/series/documentaries starts being made available in download only. If that's the case, online retailers will have to provide huge bandwidth in order to cater for all those people having to buy their media through download only. If this happens, those without an internet connection will have to get one.
Yes, the quality is not as good, but it's OK for tablets etc.
You might be right, didn't think of UHD. There's always something that comes along and uses more bandwidth I guess.
Yes, the quality is not as good, but it's OK for tablets etc.
You might be right, didn't think of UHD. There's always something that comes along and uses more bandwidth I guess.
I think there might come a time when there'll be no point at all in upping the detail because there'll be so many pixels on the screen that absolutely everything can be seen, and there won't be any hint that you're looking at a screen. I think we've got a long way to go before that happens. I mean, take the iPad for instance. It has about 2,048 pixels wide and yet, obviously, a small screen. If so many of the iPad's screens were laid out on a 32 inch TV screen, the number of pixels would be between 8-10,000 wide, I'm guessing. So, I think we still have a long way to go. I'm assuming the size of the iPad's pixels would be suitable for a TV.
The funny thing is people who illegally download films know it's wrong and hide behind some really screwed logic that "it's ok I wouldn't have bought it anyway", or "there are worse crimes so it's OK". LOL. If you weren't going to watch the film vote with your wallet and don't buy, simple. I'm sure many of those that won't pay for a film are happy to put down a four quid for a coffee or beer but not a penny on something which cost millions to make.
The funny thing is people who illegally download films know it's wrong and hide behind some really screwed logic that "it's ok I wouldn't have bought it anyway", or "there are worse crimes so it's OK". LOL. If you weren't going to watch the film vote with your wallet and don't buy, simple. I'm sure many of those that won't pay for a film are happy to put down a four quid for a coffee or beer but not a penny on something which cost millions to make.
Quite a lot of Blu-Rays these days let you have a copy in the cloud using the UltraViolet service https://www.myuv.com/ You get a card with a code to enter with the Blu-Ray. You have to link your account to another service to stream your stuff. I use Flixter.
Very useful for watching on different devices. Tablets, phones, Roku boxes, etc.
As for Blu-Ray been the last physical storage, I'd say very possibly.
Ultraviolet is crap, I literally cannot give codes away. No one wants them!
The funny thing is people who illegally download films know it's wrong and hide behind some really screwed logic that "it's ok I wouldn't have bought it anyway", or "there are worse crimes so it's OK". LOL. If you weren't going to watch the film vote with your wallet and don't buy, simple. I'm sure many of those that won't pay for a film are happy to put down a four quid for a coffee or beer but not a penny on something which cost millions to make.
I really hope the worst for these idiots.
I don't hide behind that logic at all. I buy films/series/documentaries that I like enough.
Or even, taken from the same legal definition of theft.
Para 6 “With the intention of permanently depriving the other of it”.
(1)A person appropriating property belonging to another without meaning the other permanently to lose the thing itself is nevertheless to be regarded as having the intention of permanently depriving the other of it if his intention is to treat the thing as his own to dispose of regardless of the other’s rights; and a borrowing or lending of it may amount to so treating it if, but only if, the borrowing or lending is for a period and in circumstances making it equivalent to an outright taking or disposal.
Sections 4(1) and 5(1) of this Act shall apply generally for purposes of this Act as they apply for purposes of section 1.
.
(2)
For purposes of this Act—
.
(a)
“gain” and “loss” are to be construed as extending only to gain or loss in money or other property, but as extending to any such gain or loss whether temporary or permanent; and—
.
(i)
“gain” includes a gain by keeping what one has, as well as a gain by getting what one has not; and
.
(ii)
“loss” includes a loss by not getting what one might get, as well as a loss by parting with what one has;
.
(b)
“goods”, except in so far as the context otherwise requires, includes money and every other description of property except land, and includes things severed from the land by stealing [F1; and.
.
(c)
“mail bag” and “postal packet” have the meanings given by section 125(1) of the Postal Services Act 2000.F1F1]
what people are getting confused with is reading the simple "basic definition of theft" at the link below, and ignoring or not bothering to read the rest
similarly they are getting confused by reading the simple "With the intention of permanently depriving the other of it" part, and ignoring or not bothering to read the rest
the more you read of the entire act, the clearer it becomes. as with most legal documents, if you only read parts you can usually jump to the wrong conclusions
I don't hide behind that logic at all. I buy films/series/documentaries that I like enough.
I didn't entirely enjoy the can of weird Polish lager I tried the other day. Should I ask for my money back or the next time I want to try another Polish lager, should I just nick a can then if I like it, I then buy a crate of the stuff?
I didn't entirely enjoy the can of weird Polish lager I tried the other day. Should I ask for my money back or the next time I want to try another Polish lager, should I just nick a can then if I like it, I then buy a crate of the stuff?
Why are you trying to act like that completely different thing is similar? Try an actual comparison, let's say you come round to my house one night for a few beers and I have my ipod on speakers playing nice music. Are you "stealing" from the song artists every time you listen to a track you haven't bought? Of course not.
I didn't entirely enjoy the can of weird Polish lager I tried the other day. Should I ask for my money back or the next time I want to try another Polish lager, should I just nick a can then if I like it, I then buy a crate of the stuff?
That lager was only able to be consumed once. Films/series/documentaries can be watched countless times.
Why are you trying to act like that completely different thing is similar? Try an actual comparison, let's say you come round to my house one night for a few beers and I have my ipod on speakers playing nice music. Are you "stealing" from the song artists every time you listen to a track you haven't bought? Of course not.
Of course not, but if I illegally copy any of the songs and keep for myself, that's a different scenario altogether.
what people are getting confused with is reading the simple "basic definition of theft" at the link below, and ignoring or not bothering to read the rest
similarly they are getting confused by reading the simple "With the intention of permanently depriving the other of it" part, and ignoring or not bothering to read the rest
the more you read of the entire act, the clearer it becomes. as with most legal documents, if you only read parts you can usually jump to the wrong conclusions
But people caught downloading are not charged under the theft act.
Comments
As I said yesterday I never claimed that piracy can't result in a loss, just if the pirate was never going to buy the product there was no lost sale. Some people were saying there was a lost sale, I was pointing out that factual error. Nothing more nothing less. You seem to have extrapolated from this that I think piracy is a good thing, which I've never said it is.
Can you imagine if other companies started using the practices that the media industry uses...
Imagine going to buy to Peugeot and buying a car, only to be told that you are only allowed to drive it on motorways, and if you want to drive around town you must pay for another car to use instead because you are not allowed to drive the first car on any road other than a motorway...
But this is the intellectual property law which works world wide since the Berne convention in 1886 ..... Seems to have worked for about 130 years...
And PRS has existed for over 100 years ...
I know. It's absolutely ridiculous! If people buy a DVD/Blu-Ray, they should be able to copy it to their devices. The film and music industry are getting too big for their boots. Power has gone to their heads.
For the crime he committed?
I know they didn't try to claim that tax evasion was murder they accepted it was a different crime. Why do you struggle with the same concept?
Tax evasion <> Rape <> Murder <> Theft <> Incorrect grammar <> Wearing armour in the House of Commons
Are you sitting down for this.....?
I think this is the one area that we can agree on - I do think it's a bit cheeky to expect people to buy a Blu-ray to watch on their lovely home-cinema system, then if they want to watch said film on an iPad, they have to buy a second copy.
I wonder if Bill Gates' prophecy will be true, in that Blu-ray, as a storage medium will be the last physical storage media before we go down the cloud-based/online/download only route? If it is, it's not exactly going to help stop piracy.....unless there's a way to somehow tether downloads to devices? I daresay with dynamic IP addresses, VPNs, firewalls, etc., there'll be just too many ways in which to circumvent any security measures...
Nah, I suspect variants and improvements on the micro SD card format will continue to evolve for quite a while yet. Bill didn't have the UK phone network to contend with. My LG G4 is patiently waiting for the 2TB card to appear so I can fill it up with legitimately acquired 4K movies
Quite a lot of Blu-Rays these days let you have a copy in the cloud using the UltraViolet service https://www.myuv.com/ You get a card with a code to enter with the Blu-Ray. You have to link your account to another service to stream your stuff. I use Flixter.
Very useful for watching on different devices. Tablets, phones, Roku boxes, etc.
As for Blu-Ray been the last physical storage, I'd say very possibly.
I used that service and the picture quality of the film wasn't as good as it should have been. As for the bit in bold, what about UHD? Unless, of course, the buying of films/series/documentaries starts being made available in download only. If that's the case, online retailers will have to provide huge bandwidth in order to cater for all those people having to buy their media through download only. If this happens, those without an internet connection will have to get one.
Yes, the quality is not as good, but it's OK for tablets etc.
You might be right, didn't think of UHD. There's always something that comes along and uses more bandwidth I guess.
I think there might come a time when there'll be no point at all in upping the detail because there'll be so many pixels on the screen that absolutely everything can be seen, and there won't be any hint that you're looking at a screen. I think we've got a long way to go before that happens. I mean, take the iPad for instance. It has about 2,048 pixels wide and yet, obviously, a small screen. If so many of the iPad's screens were laid out on a 32 inch TV screen, the number of pixels would be between 8-10,000 wide, I'm guessing. So, I think we still have a long way to go. I'm assuming the size of the iPad's pixels would be suitable for a TV.
I really hope the worst for these idiots.
Four quid for a coffee? Wow, idiots indeed.
Ultraviolet is crap, I literally cannot give codes away. No one wants them!
I don't. why do you think I do?
you surely must know that the authorities... well ready it for yourself
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Capone
sometimes it's easier to take action against someone for something else that can be more easily proved
I don't hide behind that logic at all. I buy films/series/documentaries that I like enough.
in addition to what you say...
here is a copy of the original act in pdf form...
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/pdfs/ukpga_19680060_en.pdf
here's another digital copy
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/contents
on the last link look at section 34, which is as follows...
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/34
what people are getting confused with is reading the simple "basic definition of theft" at the link below, and ignoring or not bothering to read the rest
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/1
similarly they are getting confused by reading the simple "With the intention of permanently depriving the other of it" part, and ignoring or not bothering to read the rest
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/60/section/6
the more you read of the entire act, the clearer it becomes. as with most legal documents, if you only read parts you can usually jump to the wrong conclusions
I didn't entirely enjoy the can of weird Polish lager I tried the other day. Should I ask for my money back or the next time I want to try another Polish lager, should I just nick a can then if I like it, I then buy a crate of the stuff?
Why are you trying to act like that completely different thing is similar? Try an actual comparison, let's say you come round to my house one night for a few beers and I have my ipod on speakers playing nice music. Are you "stealing" from the song artists every time you listen to a track you haven't bought? Of course not.
That lager was only able to be consumed once. Films/series/documentaries can be watched countless times.
Of course not, but if I illegally copy any of the songs and keep for myself, that's a different scenario altogether.
So what? Why can't I try other, more tangible products free of charge before I buy?
But people caught downloading are not charged under the theft act.
I suggest you pick a comparison that's the same.