Official All Things TV Thread
-
@Joyfano said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
@Joyfano said:
I don't watch TV
Weirdo...
lols seriously we don't have TV in our apartment haha
Torrents are your friend...
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
@Joyfano said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
@Joyfano said:
I don't watch TV
Weirdo...
lols seriously we don't have TV in our apartment haha
Torrents are your friend...
They have like a 128Kb/s connection. She can barely download text. Torrenting won't get her anything.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
@Joyfano said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
@Joyfano said:
I don't watch TV
Weirdo...
lols seriously we don't have TV in our apartment haha
Torrents are your friend...
They have like a 128Kb/s connection. She can barely download text. Torrenting won't get her anything.
haha True.. I can't do anything with that connection
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
@Joyfano said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
@Joyfano said:
I don't watch TV
Weirdo...
lols seriously we don't have TV in our apartment haha
Torrents are your friend...
They have like a 128Kb/s connection. She can barely download text. Torrenting won't get her anything.
Ok, that's just painful...
-
I'm partial to Dr. Who.
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
@Joyfano said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
@Joyfano said:
I don't watch TV
Weirdo...
lols seriously we don't have TV in our apartment haha
Torrents are your friend...
And that's illegal for copyrighted content. It makes those that pay, pay more due to loss of sales. Volume of sales decreases the price.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
And that's illegal for copyrighted content. It makes those that pay, pay more due to loss of sales. Volume of sales decreases the price.
No, it's the opposite. Pirating reduces demand for paid content and lower demand lowers prices and reduces profits for the content providers. Look how the cost of CDs has plummeted since Napster was invented. Pirating largely influences the profits going into fat executives, not the price you and I pay. Think of BitTorrent as a competitor to Amazon and Napster - competition lowers prices, it doesn't increase them.
In economics terms, it's simple supply and demand.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
And that's illegal for copyrighted content. It makes those that pay, pay more due to loss of sales. Volume of sales decreases the price.
No, it's the opposite. Pirating reduces demand for paid content and lower demand lowers prices and reduces profits for the content providers. Look how the cost of CDs has plummeted since Napster was invented. Pirating largely influences the profits going into fat executives, not the price you and I pay. Think of BitTorrent as a competitor to Amazon and Napster - competition lowers prices, it doesn't increase them.
In economics terms, it's simple supply and demand.
That might be something Pirate's say to justify their actions. But, prices of Video and Film is not based on demand in anyway. We have meetings at the begging of productions, to say what all are needs are. a Budget is then made, and from that budget a price to charge is set. lower demand will not lower the price. It will cause it to stop being producer and no further licenses are released. In the case of a theater run, the run will be cut very short and the cryptokeys for the harddrives the theater's are using will be disabled as they have to use a webside to enable the harddrive for each and every showing.
Demand doesn't affect price, budget does. When a budget is met the price will generally be lowered. Now Amazon, Walmart etc might lower the prices of their renaming physical copies or license, once discounted if their reseller agreement allows. But in the video world things are cancelled with low demand.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
And that's illegal for copyrighted content. It makes those that pay, pay more due to loss of sales. Volume of sales decreases the price.
No, it's the opposite. Pirating reduces demand for paid content and lower demand lowers prices and reduces profits for the content providers. Look how the cost of CDs has plummeted since Napster was invented. Pirating largely influences the profits going into fat executives, not the price you and I pay. Think of BitTorrent as a competitor to Amazon and Napster - competition lowers prices, it doesn't increase them.
In economics terms, it's simple supply and demand.
While I agree with this, it doesn't change the fact that torrenting, to download copyrighted media, is illegal in most nations. Copyrighting is not a free market/supply and demand idea. Instead it creates a limited monopoly for the terms of the copyright, or patent. Originally it was to protect and encourage innovation... not really sure that it still does that though.
-
@coliver said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
And that's illegal for copyrighted content. It makes those that pay, pay more due to loss of sales. Volume of sales decreases the price.
No, it's the opposite. Pirating reduces demand for paid content and lower demand lowers prices and reduces profits for the content providers. Look how the cost of CDs has plummeted since Napster was invented. Pirating largely influences the profits going into fat executives, not the price you and I pay. Think of BitTorrent as a competitor to Amazon and Napster - competition lowers prices, it doesn't increase them.
In economics terms, it's simple supply and demand.
While I agree with this, it doesn't change the fact that torrenting, to download copyrighted media, is illegal in most nations. Copyrighting is not a free market/supply and demand idea. Instead it creates a limited monopoly for the terms of the copyright, or patent. Originally it was to protect and encourage innovation... not really sure that it still does that though.
My philosophy is that if it's been on TV and I could have recorded it and converted it to a digital file, how is that any different?
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
@coliver said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
And that's illegal for copyrighted content. It makes those that pay, pay more due to loss of sales. Volume of sales decreases the price.
No, it's the opposite. Pirating reduces demand for paid content and lower demand lowers prices and reduces profits for the content providers. Look how the cost of CDs has plummeted since Napster was invented. Pirating largely influences the profits going into fat executives, not the price you and I pay. Think of BitTorrent as a competitor to Amazon and Napster - competition lowers prices, it doesn't increase them.
In economics terms, it's simple supply and demand.
While I agree with this, it doesn't change the fact that torrenting, to download copyrighted media, is illegal in most nations. Copyrighting is not a free market/supply and demand idea. Instead it creates a limited monopoly for the terms of the copyright, or patent. Originally it was to protect and encourage innovation... not really sure that it still does that though.
My philosophy is that if it's been on TV and I could have recorded it and converted it to a digital file, how is that any different?
So if it's been on TV you'll go to walmart and steal a copy of it? It's the same thing. Stealing is Stealing.
-
Are we talking TV shows or movies here?
I don't condone piracy, but that said, without it we definitely wouldn't have many of the options/technologies we have today.
When it's easier to acquire music on Napster than from the retailer, then people are going to switch. Apple clearly showed that when the price point is good (from the customer perspective) and access is easy (iTunes) people will flock to purchases.
The same goes for movies and today we have services like Netflix and Vudu that charge reasonable rates for a pretty good if not great product. And I'm really glad to see that HBO is finally joining the full on digital age and providing a non cable connected service.
-
@Dashrender said:
Are we talking TV shows or movies here?
I don't condone piracy, but that said, without it we definitely wouldn't have many of the options/technologies we have today.
When it's easier to acquire music on Napster than from the retailer, then people are going to switch. Apple clearly showed that when the price point is good (from the customer perspective) and access is easy (iTunes) people will flock to purchases.
The same goes for movies and today we have services like Netflix and Vudu that charge reasonable rates for a pretty good if not great product. And I'm really glad to see that HBO is finally joining the full on digital age and providing a non cable connected service.
Totally agree with this. My biggest issue with Netflix is the delay between when a season finishes and when it goes up on the site. Haven't gotten into Hulu as of yet...
-
I don't have a problem with that delay. The delay is there to drive sales of Blurays. If you want it right now, buy the Bluray, if you can stand waiting a month, well then.. lol wait.
I made this decision on Lucy. I really wanted to watch the movie again (though the ending was horrible!) but when I read that it would be on Netflix a month later, I figured that buying the movie was pointless.
*Edit: Well I guess I didn't read the fine print good enough, Lucy will only be available from Netflix on the DVD rental side. I guess it's a good thing my friend has a copy I can borrow, I don't feel like paying $25 for the HD version from Vudu.
-
@thanksajdotcom said:
@coliver said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
And that's illegal for copyrighted content. It makes those that pay, pay more due to loss of sales. Volume of sales decreases the price.
No, it's the opposite. Pirating reduces demand for paid content and lower demand lowers prices and reduces profits for the content providers. Look how the cost of CDs has plummeted since Napster was invented. Pirating largely influences the profits going into fat executives, not the price you and I pay. Think of BitTorrent as a competitor to Amazon and Napster - competition lowers prices, it doesn't increase them.
In economics terms, it's simple supply and demand.
While I agree with this, it doesn't change the fact that torrenting, to download copyrighted media, is illegal in most nations. Copyrighting is not a free market/supply and demand idea. Instead it creates a limited monopoly for the terms of the copyright, or patent. Originally it was to protect and encourage innovation... not really sure that it still does that though.
My philosophy is that if it's been on TV and I could have recorded it and converted it to a digital file, how is that any different?
Technically you aren't supposed to do that. Watching television you are given very limited rights to reproduce any media that you see on it. With purchased media you are allowed to make a backup of it but the moment that backup becomes publicly available you are liable for the damages caused by it. With television you really aren't allowed to do even that.
-
Speaking of borrowing a movie. Considering how difficult it is to loan someone your digital content (most systems don't have a mechanism for this), sales in general will probably increase significantly because of digital sales like iTunes/Google Play/Amazon, etc. due to their play nearly anywhere convenience
-
@coliver said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
@coliver said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
And that's illegal for copyrighted content. It makes those that pay, pay more due to loss of sales. Volume of sales decreases the price.
No, it's the opposite. Pirating reduces demand for paid content and lower demand lowers prices and reduces profits for the content providers. Look how the cost of CDs has plummeted since Napster was invented. Pirating largely influences the profits going into fat executives, not the price you and I pay. Think of BitTorrent as a competitor to Amazon and Napster - competition lowers prices, it doesn't increase them.
In economics terms, it's simple supply and demand.
While I agree with this, it doesn't change the fact that torrenting, to download copyrighted media, is illegal in most nations. Copyrighting is not a free market/supply and demand idea. Instead it creates a limited monopoly for the terms of the copyright, or patent. Originally it was to protect and encourage innovation... not really sure that it still does that though.
My philosophy is that if it's been on TV and I could have recorded it and converted it to a digital file, how is that any different?
Technically you aren't supposed to do that. Watching television you are given very limited rights to reproduce any media that you see on it. With purchased media you are allowed to make a backup of it but the moment that backup becomes publicly available you are liable for the damages caused by it. With television you really aren't allowed to do even that.
Actually it is legal to record it. for very limited usage. But must only be used to watch once later then removed. This decision was made in the Betamax case. this was back in the 1980's.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
@coliver said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
And that's illegal for copyrighted content. It makes those that pay, pay more due to loss of sales. Volume of sales decreases the price.
No, it's the opposite. Pirating reduces demand for paid content and lower demand lowers prices and reduces profits for the content providers. Look how the cost of CDs has plummeted since Napster was invented. Pirating largely influences the profits going into fat executives, not the price you and I pay. Think of BitTorrent as a competitor to Amazon and Napster - competition lowers prices, it doesn't increase them.
In economics terms, it's simple supply and demand.
While I agree with this, it doesn't change the fact that torrenting, to download copyrighted media, is illegal in most nations. Copyrighting is not a free market/supply and demand idea. Instead it creates a limited monopoly for the terms of the copyright, or patent. Originally it was to protect and encourage innovation... not really sure that it still does that though.
My philosophy is that if it's been on TV and I could have recorded it and converted it to a digital file, how is that any different?
So if it's been on TV you'll go to walmart and steal a copy of it? It's the same thing. Stealing is Stealing.
Right, which I meant by limited use. I meant you aren't allowed to create a backup for personal use... Didn't one of the media companies try and force all DVRs to have the record once, watch once feature?
-
@coliver said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@thanksajdotcom said:
@coliver said:
@Carnival-Boy said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
And that's illegal for copyrighted content. It makes those that pay, pay more due to loss of sales. Volume of sales decreases the price.
No, it's the opposite. Pirating reduces demand for paid content and lower demand lowers prices and reduces profits for the content providers. Look how the cost of CDs has plummeted since Napster was invented. Pirating largely influences the profits going into fat executives, not the price you and I pay. Think of BitTorrent as a competitor to Amazon and Napster - competition lowers prices, it doesn't increase them.
In economics terms, it's simple supply and demand.
While I agree with this, it doesn't change the fact that torrenting, to download copyrighted media, is illegal in most nations. Copyrighting is not a free market/supply and demand idea. Instead it creates a limited monopoly for the terms of the copyright, or patent. Originally it was to protect and encourage innovation... not really sure that it still does that though.
My philosophy is that if it's been on TV and I could have recorded it and converted it to a digital file, how is that any different?
So if it's been on TV you'll go to walmart and steal a copy of it? It's the same thing. Stealing is Stealing.
Right, which I meant by limited use. I meant you aren't allowed to create a backup for personal use... Didn't one of the media companies try and force all DVRs to have the record once, watch once feature?
Not that I know of. But legally that's all you are suppose to do. It's called for "time shifting" purposes. The only exception is schools,
-
I will NEVER cry 1 tear for the lost profit of movie studios or record companies. Steal it all... those fat cat execs can set piles of $$$ on fire laughing, so steal it all.
