HBO, Netflix, Other Hollywood Companies Join Forces To Fight Piracy (theverge.com) 195
New submitter stikves writes: It looks like media and technology companies are forming a group to "fight piracy." The Verge reports: "A group of 30 entertainment companies, including power players like Netflix, HBO, and NBCUniversal, have joined forces today in an effort to fight online piracy. The new group is called the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE), and the partnership, while somewhat thin on specifics, will allow the content creators involved to pool resources to conduct research and work closely with law enforcement to find and stop pirates from stealing movies and TV shows. The first-of-its-kind alliance is composed of digital media players, networks, and Hollywood outfits, and all recognize how the internet has paved the way to an explosion in quality online content. However, piracy has boomed as a result: ACE says that last year saw 5.4 billion downloads of pirated films and TV shows." I'm not sure how these statistics hold against real revenue loss (or the imaginary one), however this might be a development to watch for.
Time to cancel netflix (Score:5, Interesting)
I canceled cable for this reason. It's morally wrong to finance the fight against freedom on the Internet. And destroying freedom on the Internet is the only way to enforce the their laws.
Re: Time to cancel netflix (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I do love how you blame Netflix for that, when in reality it was the content holders they were licensing that brought massive pressure against them to stop geo blocking evasion with VPNs. Netflix played the fool for ages against the licensors saying there wasn't any way to stop VPNs until they were finally backed to a cliff edge.
Re: (Score:2)
So with Netflix part of this alliance maybe the content creators will actually listen?
I pay for Netflix and Amazon Prime instead of cable. If what I want is there great, no need to bother with the hassle and risk of downloading it elsewhere. If it *was* there and is now gone I find that highly irksome and might actually be bothered to look elsewhere.
Re: Time to cancel netflix (Score:2)
Re:Time to cancel netflix (Score:5, Insightful)
I canceled cable because most (not all) of what was offered is pure shit.
Sports, home decorating, sports, celebrity crap, hunting bigfoot, cooking, cooking, sports, cooking, game shows, shopping channel, honey boo boo, ice truckers, reality TV shows, more shopping, more celebrity crap, fishing, golfing, more bigfoot, more game shows....and on and on. It's drivel, replicated over and over and over.
Re: (Score:2)
I canceled cable because most (not all) of what was offered is pure shit.
Sports, home decorating, sports, celebrity crap, hunting bigfoot, cooking, cooking, sports, cooking, game shows, shopping channel, honey boo boo, ice truckers, reality TV shows, more shopping, more celebrity crap, fishing, golfing, more bigfoot, more game shows....and on and on. It's drivel, replicated over and over and over.
You forgot to mention the ads. I haven't seen that much content for years. Its only ads, ads ads...
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, same reason I cancelled cable. I'm paying a company to sling me ads? Hell with that.
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot to mention the ads. I haven't seen that much content for years. Its only ads, ads ads...
Ah yes, ads. I remember them fondly. Well, actually it's *not* seeing them anymore is what I remember fondly.
I was at a friend's place the other day...he had the TV machine on, and I was astounded by how frequently the program was interrupted by commercials to sell me cat food, tampons, insurance, soft drinks, a weight loss program, automobiles, home loans, mayonnaise, other TV shows, cereal, sneakers, pizza, various kinds of medication, and a slew of other shit I can't recall. It was mind boggling.
It was d
Re: (Score:2)
I canceled cable because most (not all) of what was offered is pure shit.
Sports, home decorating, sports, celebrity crap, hunting bigfoot, cooking, cooking, sports, cooking, game shows, shopping channel, honey boo boo, ice truckers, reality TV shows, more shopping, more celebrity crap, fishing, golfing, more bigfoot, more game shows....and on and on. It's drivel, replicated over and over and over.
This is just pure profit. The business model is shifting now as it appears they are shifting the burden of share holder satisfaction, when the programmes are terrible, hit the pirates with fines rather than new subscribers rewarding with revenue. There's also a hint that they're expecting others in the pool to plug the gaps, thus some hint that the internal department can shrink as there's other outside resource now.
Re: (Score:2)
Note: I'm not pro piracy, but it doesn't seem to be that much of an issues since streaming services showed up and became easy to use... And I'm not exactly enthusiastic about the measures corporations takes to limit piracy, then tend to hurt the internet.
I've never subscribed to them... (Score:2)
... because they were a strong proponent of DRM... and unlike DRM on disks they can always update it to stop me from using my right to make a DRM free copy.
Re:Time to cancel netflix (Score:4, Insightful)
Freedom is about net neutrality, freedom of speech, democracy and so on, not about this.
I do pirate content from time to time but I'm not stupid enough to think that I'm entitled to it. I totally defend the rights of companies to create content with their own money and to profit from it.
Culture? There's lots of it available for free in public libraries around the world. Also, lots of creative commons content out there.
Re: (Score:3)
Come on, you can't seriously define freedom as being able to download Netflix and Hollywood created content.
This is a red herring. Regardless of your stance on copyright, the issue is not whether one can obtain copyrighted content for free, but rather the collateral damage to the Internet and society as a whole resulting from Hollywood's quixotic quest to eliminate copyright infringement at all costs. Most of the negative effects of this quest are born not by "pirates" but by paying customers—after all, the "pirates" get the version without any DRM while those who follow Hollywood's rules are stuck with obn
Re: (Score:2)
If you're right, then nobody needs to frivolously use government force by having courts and cops get involved in something so unimportant.
And they certainly wouldn't ever get involved in messing with people who make
Re: Time to cancel netflix (Score:5, Insightful)
Only people with money deserve access to culture. Fuck the poor! Long live financial tyranny!
Re: (Score:2)
This is insightful sarcasm. Mods, please correct it.
Re: (Score:2)
. . .or perhaps they would prefer a different method of delivery. One that delivers only the content they choose, when they want it, and no bundling of other "services" to get it.
Imagine being able to binge-watch an entire season of your favorite series, without interruption or commercials of any type, when the season begins. After all, the content is already ready to go, the networks just want to dole it out one episode per week.
Or viewing a current movie without dealing with screaming babies, people on
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Netflix doesn't offer "a current movie", and "your favorite series" is exclusive to a different streaming provider that trickles out episodes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All Netflix produced series are released all at once for your binge watching pleasure. Other series are as well, albeit after they have aired on a traditional channel.
I'm aware of that. I'm suggesting that what Salgak1 refers to as "your favorite series" happens to be one that has not yet completely "aired on a traditional channel."
Re: (Score:2)
Of course they do, its called dvds/blurays.
I buy them second hand, yard sales, library sales, bull moose.. then I rip them down to my NAS and I have access to them when I want.
You said you would pay good money.. all you have to do is wait a season for the previous one to become available.
You do realise that ripping DVDs and BluRays is just as illegal as downloading torrents, right? The powers-that-be would just as readily prosecute you as any downloader if they could.
Re: (Score:2)
You do realise that ripping DVDs and BluRays is just as illegal as downloading torrents, right? The powers-that-be would just as readily prosecute you as any downloader if they could.
As long as you delete your ripped copy when you sell the disks, your fair use defense would likely succeed.
Although the legal basis is not completely settled, many lawyers believe that the following (and many other uses) are also fair uses: Space-shifting or format-shifting - that is, taking content you own in one format and putting it into another format, for personal, non-commercial use. For instance, "ripping" an audio CD (that is, making an MP3-format version of an audio CD that you already own) [eff.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Space-shifting is legal, but the DRM on DVDs and Blu-Rays circumvents the Fair Use defense. It's not about copyright infringement, it's about DMCA violations. If you don't have permission to play or read the disc, then you broke the law and there is no Fair Use defense.
EFF's example involves media without DRM.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People who download entertainment they have not paid for are examples of massive entitlement.
You have no claim on content you haven't paid for. To think otherwise is the opposite of virtue.
Ignorant cock-sucker says what?
Dog in manger leaves money on table (Score:2)
You have no claim on content you haven't paid for
So let me pay for it. How do I go about paying for a lawful stream of the film Song of the South?
Re: (Score:2)
Or the first theatrical releases of Star wars before they were changed?
Re: Time to cancel netflix (Score:4, Funny)
"And work closely with law enforcement"
All this is certainly great news.
Finally a joint endeavour between public and private entities to put an end to this modern day scourge. Once again the waters off Somalia and other hot spots will be peaceful without pirates.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, the market cost for digital content with near zero marginal cost for reproduction is also near zero, once the initial sunk cost has been paid and the content has already been produced. This is not a sustainable business model for producing new content, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fair enough. If, as with music, you can still be commercially viable with a large market and close to but greater than zero pricing, that might be a good business model that works for all concerned. Unfortunately, music is one of relatively few areas where this can work economically. Popular fiction books is another. However, the same idea usually doesn't work for areas like movies or computer software, where the production costs are often much higher, or for work like composing or arranging orchestral scor
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is that really still true for an average, worth watching but not smash hit, kind of movie? Cinemas in my area have been struggling for a long time to get that first $10 (or its UK equivalent in my case) and the trend seems to be shifting away from buying permanent copies on disc (for significantly more than our equivalent of $10) to online services with rental library models such as Netflix (where you're paying way less than $10/movie unless you're a very light user). Meanwhile, I think Avengers 17: CGI vs.
Re: (Score:2)
Disks are doing fine, when priced in the bargain bin. Or when they do something you can't get on the subscriptions - special editions, commentary, 3D, 4k, or other features not on the subscription service.
Re: (Score:2)
However, the same idea usually doesn't work for areas like movies or computer software, where the production costs are often much higher,
All the latest figures show that Hollywood is making more money than ever. A lot of this is due to foreign sales (esp. China's market), but still, they're raking in money hand over fist now.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't that rather negate the argument that they need to provide their content in convenient formats and through convenient channels to be more successful, then? It seems like their current policies, customer-hostile as they often seem to be, are working. :-(
Re: (Score:2)
That's true: box office revenues are doing just fine. Now of course, that's across the industry worldwide; certain theaters probably aren't doing that great. Also, theaters get their money mainly from concessions, while most of the ticket price goes to the movie studio, so lots of people watching movies worldwide doesn't necessarily translate into a healthy movie theater business, but it does seem to be doing fine overall really, even if there has been a contraction in the American market over the last se
Re: (Score:2)
I don't doubt your claims about theatre revenues -- I don't have any data to hand, so I'll take your word for it. This seems to be a slightly different case to the earlier discussion about market pricing, though, because with a movie theatre there's a physical presence aspect to consider as well as the work being viewed. You can't "pirate" a trip to the theatre as an alternative to whatever price they're asking for admission.
The closest analogy to doing so would probably mean if there were spare seats so yo
Re: (Score:2)
Here's one site [the-numbers.com] showing domestic box office totals. It shows attendance is actually decreasing slowly since 2001, but revenues are basically holding steady (thanks to higher ticket prices).
And Here's an article [hollywoodreporter.com] about 2015 numbers showing that global box office revenues hit a record $38B+ that year.
Over here, [pwc.com] a sound-bite box mentions that (presumably domestic) revenues from at-home movie-viewing surpassed the box office in 2015 (11B to 10B).
So, AFAICT, the movie industry is whining about something that isn
Crowdfunding instead (Score:2)
This is not a sustainable business model for producing new content, though.
Then crowdfund the creation of new works instead of restricting their distribution.
Re: (Score:2)
Crowdfunding is one of the more promising alternatives, I agree. However, on the evidence so far, it's typically between one and two orders of magnitude less effective in current implementations. It's also becoming increasingly clear that current crowdfunding models leave a great deal of risk with the funders rather than the content creators, which I'm not sure is a good thing. If and when we get better at it -- possibly with a general shift in our culture back towards respecting content creators and being
It's fine, I just won't watch anymore (Score:3, Insightful)
I pirate stuff I'm wishy washy about. If I really want something, I'll buy it. Usually I end up buying stuff I pirated.
But whatever, no more pirating means a lot less buying. Saves me money!
Re: It's fine, I just won't watch anymore (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That's how I am too. We remember growing up in the 80s/90s movies were fantastic. You watched them and watched them again. Now, I see a new on theater movie and it's 50/50 if it's going to suck (closer to 75/25). So, I watch it for free, if it is memorable then I purchase.
Hint: Everybody remembers what they grew up with as fantastic. It's got a lot more to do with being 15 and not 35 rather than the actual content. Try looking at them again as if you were looking at it the first time and had no relationship to it, if this was a new release today would you feel the same? Take for example Ferris Bueller's day off [imdb.com]. I loved that movie back then, but when you take a step way back is it any less cheesy than similar "rebel" movies from the 60s, 70s, 90s, 00s or 10s? No, but they al
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Hint: Everybody remembers what they grew up with as fantastic. It's got a lot more to do with being 15 and not 35 rather than the actual content.
You are entitled to your opinion, but your above statement is easily refuted.
Go watch Lawrence of Arabia and tell me there's no difference in content. Just because you don't acknowledge there were truly great movies made in the past doesn't mean it didn't happen. What's next, are you going to claim the 19th century produced no great music ? Just because you have t
Re: (Score:2)
I am not the OP but i do agree, largely. I would split it into two phenomenon:
1. At 15, it is much easier to be impressed. you have less experience of what the world has to offer. In my day (80s kid) there was a lot less choice so you watched and re-watched the same things until you loved them. You had a lot more free time to watch. And, importantly, you are selecting which groups you will be part of. Your media consumption both influences and is influenced by that but I feel teens latch onto cultural
Re: (Score:2)
The Beatles were the pop teenie girl sensations of their day. People grew up and remember it as some kind of high art. Just like when jazz first started and it was only in the clubs with illegal drinking and graduated to big bands once the fan base aged. Same thing is happening with rock and metal
Re: (Score:2)
50 years from now there will no doubt be somebody waxing nostalgic about the good ole days of the early 2000s, remembering our movies that have stood the test of time
What movies from the 2010s will stand the test of time? Can you name even one? I can't.
I can think of a few good ones from the 2000s, esp. the early 2000s (LotR comes to mind first), but not much, and certainly nothing really fantastic and memorable after about 2005.
I'm really tired of this trope about "we only remember the good stuff and for
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, this is just plain bullshit, because the simple fact that disproves your argument is that the industries have changed. Go back to the 80s and 90s and look at how many remakes there were: very few (and what few there were were radically different from whatever ancient B&W 50s movie they remade, such as John Carpenter's "The Thing" in 1982). Look how many superhero movies there were back then: almost none. Now, all the movies are superhero franchise installments, remakes, sequels, prequels, etc.
MPAA and RIAA logic has more money.. (Score:2)
MPAA and RIAA logic has more money being lost than what is actually available.
If they somehow magically managed to stop copying, it wouldn't make them more money. instead people would flock more to youtube and indies that are literally giving their stuff for free.
nevermind that riaa is already giving their stuff for free on youtube themselves.
That's remarkably LOW downloading (Score:5, Insightful)
Less than 1 download per person. If this was a food try before you buy) , that means not everyone took one.
Sounds to me like people are most likely trying to get reasonable service that is not available for sale, rather than pirating.
Re: (Score:3)
No, it's about racists that think China doesn't have internet access. More than 1/2 of China has internet access, although most of them use mobile platforms. (https://thenextweb.com/asia/2014/01/16/chinas-internet-population-numbered-618m-end-2013-81-connecting-via-mobile/) To get numbers like that it means that even rice farmers get the internet.
India has similar numbers.
Basically, the population of most countries is currently in large cities and people living in large cities get the internet. It is
Re: (Score:2)
Shang-Hai and Beijing are exceptions, not the rule.
And Guangzhou, Hongkong, and others are the exceptions as well. There are many many exceptions. So many so, that there are more exceptions than non-exceptions. About 60% live in conditions better than you'd find in Michigan.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They've already been fighting piracy for years... (Score:3)
Re: They've already been fighting piracy for years (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
make shows and films so god damned awful that no one will bother to pirate them
Exactly; Hollywood's been doing a great job of this for at least 10 years now. When I want to watch any movies, it's only stuff that's over 10 years old, and usually from the 70s and 80s, with some in the 90s, 60s, 40s, and a few things before that, and some stuff in the early 2000s. After about 2008, Hollywood movies went straight down the toilet.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of that is due to the new funding mix.
As nations other than the USA fund movies made in the USA, political and faith issues start to reshape US scripts.
If the US upsets a faith, cult or Communist party, funding stops.
Once a script is corrected, funding flows again.
Copyright gets no respect in this country (Score:5, Insightful)
and thats because the social contract has been nullified. The deal was that we give them a temporary monopoly and in return they add to the public domain. Sonny Bono & Mickey Mouse suspended public domain indefinitely, and thus have reneged on their side of the social contract. Why should we continue to uphold our end of the bargain?
This is why no one has any respect for copyright, nobody feels the slightest twinge of guilt bypassing your paywalls & getting your content for free. Perhaps someday you'll be able to get society at large back to the table to discuss a new contract, but i doubt it.
Until then I guess you'll just have to keep suing your customers, thats a sure way to win back their loyalty.
Re:Copyright gets no respect in this country (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Who do you think pushed for the convention to have such long copyright terms? It just lets the media companies save face by saying "No, we don't want this long copyright, but international law requires it so pity us" and the novice person takes that at face value rather than looking into who wrote those sections of international law. Simple misdirection and sadly it works. We increased international standards as a workaround to directly increasing them here as doing so would have been too politically unp
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The deal was that we give them a temporary monopoly and in return they add to the public domain. Sonny Bono & Mickey Mouse suspended public domain indefinitely, and thus have reneged on their side of the social contract. Why should we continue to uphold our end of the bargain?
This is a common argument, but a lame one. The vast majority of content that is illegally shared online is very recent, often less than a year or two old. It would have been covered by copyright even in the original form with just a few years of protection for the rightsholder.
The erosion of the public domain and repeated extensions to the length of copyright protection are real problems and should be fixed, but they are a very issue.
This is why no one has any respect for copyright, nobody feels the slightest twinge of guilt bypassing your paywalls & getting your content for free.
A lot of people don't even understand copyright. They just assume that if
Re: (Score:2)
The deal was that we give them a temporary monopoly and in return they add to the public domain. Sonny Bono & Mickey Mouse suspended public domain indefinitely, and thus have reneged on their side of the social contract. Why should we continue to uphold our end of the bargain?
This is a common argument, but a lame one.
Standing up for your rights is lame? Why don't you just sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up, then?
Re: (Score:2)
No, arguing that one bad act that has a small effect on a few people morally justifies another bad act done by many people with much greater effect is lame. Not as lame as resorting to swearing at someone because you haven't got a real argument, perhaps, but still lame.
Re: (Score:2)
Copyright not expiring at all does have a relatively small effect, simply because most things that people actually want to copy are naturally the newer and as-yet less widely experienced works. Obviously the principle of endless extensions is a violation of everything copyright was meant to be and should be fixed; I'm not in any way suggesting otherwise. However, as a practical matter it doesn't actually make much difference whether it's 50 years of 500 years of protection if 99% of what everyone wants to s
Re: (Score:2)
public doman stealing via copyright/patents & (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and thats because the social contract has been nullified. The deal was that we give them a temporary monopoly and in return they add to the public domain.
No, that's the idea behind patents, not copyright.
For the author, copyright is not temporary, and has never been. It is always life + X years. The original point of the post mortem period was to preserve the original work.
The copyright economy we have now is a new thing. That "social contract" never really was.
Re: (Score:2)
For the author, copyright is not temporary, and has never been. It is always life + X years.
IIRC, the original period of copyright in the US was 14 years, which was later allowed to be renewed once. It stayed that way for some time. Then the increasing lengths started. There were a few increases beyond that, I think up to about 50 years total which is probably too long but still semi-sane. Once the copyright on Steamboat Willie was about to expire, the Sonny Bono copyright act came along and extended that signifcantly, and it's been extended a couple more times since.
The Constitutional purpose of
Re: (Score:2)
You are right.
I live in France, and I assumed that the copyright system is similar to "droit d'auteur". It is nowadays but it used to be completely different.
"droit d'auteur" is focused on more on moral rights and copyright is more about economics. For example, there is no concept of "work for hire" in the French system.
Just make yourself invisible (Score:2)
Easy way to stop piracy (Score:5, Informative)
Want to stop piracy? Then make all content available everywhere. Don't make me sign up for Netflix, Amazon Video, HBO Now, Hulu, and a half dozen streaming providers just to watch the content I want to see.
If you make it easier to pirate content than to purchase it legally, you're going to lose the battle.
And don't nickel and dime me, don't make me pay $3.99/episode for a show that will cost $20 when all 20 episodes come out on DVD, stuff like that is what make people decide to click on the torrent instead of the "Purchase" link.
Re: (Score:3)
>Want to stop piracy? Then make all content available everywhere. Don't make me sign up for Netflix, Amazon Video, HBO Now, Hulu, and a half dozen streaming providers just to watch the content I want to see.
I have previously predicted that the current streaming providers will become the new studios, and regional services will offer single points of access and billing to customers, becoming the new cable companies.
I believe there will be a market for companies that set up shop doing nothing more than havi
Stealing shit (Score:4, Funny)
How do you steal shit? Do you take it directly from the bowl or get in from the treatment plant in bulk? Its just not a crime I've heard of before, although nothing surprises me anymore. What do they do with the shit once they've stolen it? Is there a good market? So many questions!
Re: (Score:2)
You'll keep coming up with excuses not to pay for it. Because you are ultimately a thief who steals shit.
Me? No, I don't steal anything. The last time I torrented a movie was when I bought a brand new blu-ray and couldn't play it because my blu-ray player's firmware was out of date and it was already on the latest firmware.
So who is stealing from who in this case? I bought the movie, it's a blu-ray, I have a blu-ray player, yet could not play the movie.
It took less time to find a torrent and start the download than it did to buy the movie in the first place, the torrent was done in 90 minutes (no need to wait
Go after /. for "TV Frog" Kodi box ads (Score:2)
Contextual advertising... I live in Toronto, Ontario. At the bottom of this article is an ad that says "Ontario Cable Companies Want This Device Banned Immediately". It's labelled as an "Advertorial for TVFrog". I couldn't make this stuff up.
User experience and quality first (Score:5, Insightful)
I would say they should focus on providing the same quality as pirated material on all markets at the same time.
They can never provide better quality, since what they provide will be copied. But make sure all customers with good enough connections can stream/download as high quality as possible, for a fair price.
Don't geo block. The ones who get blocked will get it some other way.
No need for big investments in DRM. What can be seen & heard can and will be replicated. Accept that. You're just making it annoying for legitimate customers, while the pirates enjoy DRM free versions from torrent sites.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not even torrent sites anymore. There are tons of websites streaming....everything....for ad views. I can make a list of 4-5 movies I'm interested in, and generally find a couple of them being streamed at 1080p. Live sports too! A little computer running Ubuntu and Google are all I need to watch pretty much whatever I want when I want it. Is it 4k? No. But I don't have a 4k TV, so that doesn't bother me. Sometimes are there compression artifacts? Sure. But for the cost and convenience, it blows away th
Wow! (Score:2)
Are they all building ships now?
Aaargh!
Ooh ooh, can I try .. (Score:2)
guessing the one plan they won't come up with? Offer good content at an affordable price, in a timely and accessible manner.
Maybe make reasonable legal offers? (Score:2)
Copyright is not intended to withhold content from people, yet that is what it often boils down to. For example, I cannot even get most of what I watch where I live (shows in original, non-dubbed form, I will not watch dubbed trash) from any sources approved by the content owners. Now I can either not watch their products at all or download them from the net somewhere (which happens to be legal here). But if there was a reasonable online offering by the content owners, I would of course use that, far simple
Re: (Score:2)
Copyright is not intended to withhold content from people, yet that is what it often boils down to
What? Yes. Yes it is. That is the only thing it is meant to do. The original form of copyright, where you had to let the scribes in Alexandria copy any book you brought through the harbor, was about getting content into people's hands. The current form is about keeping it out.
What? (Score:2)
What is this "explosion in quality online content" of which you speak?
Do you mean re-makes of old stuff, endless sequels and prequals, and more films where Tom Cruise is a super-ninja-spy who takes down the entire world single handedly? If so, I think maybe you're mistaken.
There are some nice things around (House of Cards, Black Sails, and maybe Lord of the Rings), but I must be missing this 'explosion', even though we have Netflix, Amazon and Freesat.
Re: (Score:2)
What is this "explosion in quality online content" of which you speak?
I stopped watching car shows because all the car shows on TV were shitty commercials for shitty cars. Now I watch them again because there are good ones on the internet. The same is true of cooking shows. Then there's whole genres which barely existed before, like shows about guns.
"Quality" doesn't necessarily mean "high production value". It can mean "chock-full of content in which I am interested".
Re: (Score:2)
Don't they understand they are winning? (Score:2)
Netflix is the best think that happened in the fight against piracy, because it is convenient and affordable.
Among my group of friends, torrents/DDL were the way we got movies. We did it without even thinking. DVDs were too expensive and cumbersome, BluRays even more so. And with TV you don't really get to choose when and what you watch, also ads.
Some of us even paid for a seedbox or some premium account on a DDL or streaming site. So money wasn't the problem.
Then came Netflix. And now, most of my friends h
Netflix has done more to fight piracy than anyone (Score:2)
Netflix has already done more to fight piracy than anyone else in the industry. They have shown that the way to fight piracy is by providing a competitive product that is priced reasonably and makes consuming content incredibly easy and convenient. It's sad to see them going down this path instead of continuing to push forward where they have made such a huge impact in the past. The biggest hurdle to Netflix are they very content creators it is now partnering with—disgusting media production compan
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Stealing? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can call it "stealing", but it will be an obvious lie. That is probably one of the reasons nobody really cares about their complaints: They start the discussion off in bad faith with a big fat lie. Disrespect your potential customers and they will disrespect you.
Re: (Score:2)
The seat was going to be empty anyway, and the theater owner wouldn't had made money on it if you didn't freeload. So what's the harm in watching for free?
Yeah I don't see the harm in that scenario. But of course the cinema does have the right to kick you out if they catch you.
Re: (Score:2)
Try and offer more series and movies on time for sale or rent in different parts of the world.
Thats the real thats holding back digital renting.
People would like to buy or rent but have to wait while local cinemas and then traditional broadcasters hold shows back for their own use.
A movie or series might not be released. It might be weeks or months late. It might be for digital sale and not for SD and HD rent.
Re:Alliance blah,blah,blah (Score:5, Insightful)
Like just about every other "alliance" of large corporations, they give themselves some bullshit name to window dress the fact that they are looking to screw people over one way or another.
In another day and age, back before crony-capitalism passed the tipping-point and jumped the shark, they had another name for a group of leading corporations in an industry working together to control a market, set prices, and lobby for laws.
A "cartel".
But, that was before the money and resources the corporations offered those in power made them realize that "cartels" are really "alliances" in many cases and are now a good thing.
Strat
Re: (Score:2)
" back before crony-capitalism passed the tipping-point and jumped the shark"
Ahh yes "That's not really real free market capitalism" argument. Sorry to tell you there crony capitalism doesn't exist because that's the way capitalism has always worked, the historical evidence is overwhelming. That rule of law can not exist within capitalism. Everytime copyright came up for review to protect the publics right it was expanded over 200 years long before you were even born.
Our brains are much worse at reality
Re: (Score:2)
What is does is that nobody takes them seriously anymore, after all they are spreading blatant lies. Dealing honestly with potential customers looks differently.