6 ms·

A business wanting to make more money by charging for their good/bad/ok product? how evil. I don't agree that copyright infringement should be a criminal rathe

A business wanting to make more money by charging for their good/bad/ok product? how evil. I don't agree that copyright infringement should be a criminal rather than civil matter. Even when I'm watching a mediocre movie, I still appreciate that it took lots of peoples time and money to create. Edit: updated with word 'more' in response to response to this response of a response

icebraining 12y ago
Parent said more money. They already make money - for example, 2014 was NBCUniversal's most profitable year in its history, and box office revenue in general has been rising.
lugg 12y ago
>> It's all about money. Hollywood is greedy and wants more to create another mediocre (at best) movies. > A business wanting to make money by charging for their good/bad/ok product? how evil. That doesn't follow in the slightest. > I don't agree that copyright infringement should be a criminal rather than civil matter. > Even when I'm watching a mediocre movie, I still appreciate that it took lots of peoples time and money to create. I'm sorry, but I still don't see what you're adding to this thread. It literally is about money. The entire industry does not want their current business model to end because of how profitable it is. It, sadly for them, is a dead horse and has been since VHS. They should have pivoted their model back then, hell, they should have at least seen it coming when napster hit the scene, everyone saw movie copying coming straight after music. Why didn't they? You can appreciate the effort of cogs in an antique machine all you like, but I started lacking all and any sympathy for the lot of them the second they started pushing bullshit takedowns all over the web[1][2]. On making money by charging for their work being evil, no it isn't, not in the slightest. Yet pushing, paying for, and lobbying behind closed doors for the kinds of censorship they are lobbying for, well that is pretty much evil no matter which way you look at it. And them losing, or being unable to make money simply does not excuse that in any way: "No industry gets to dismantle civil liberties with the poor excuse that they can't make money otherwise." [3] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effects http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effects [2] https://www.google.com/search?q=site:chillingeffects.org https://www.google.com/search?q=site:chillingeffects.org [3] https://torrentfreak.com/letter-copyright-monopoly-140921/ https://torrentfreak.com/letter-copyright-monopoly-140921/
- unfortunateface 12y ago
  My initial comment was a reaction to the sense of entitlement that I sensed in the comment. My response may be out of place in this thread, but no more than the initial comment. If I have mis-interpreted the initial content, then I apologies, but I still don't think I have. Again, I am totally against Hollywoods overreach and attempts to inflict a dying business model by the means described in the article.
nmrm 12y ago
> A business wanting to make more money by charging for their good/bad/ok product? how evil. A business encouraging governments to throw people in jail for something which has never been considered a criminal infraction in order to make more money is pretty evil. I would never dream of asking a government to throw somebody in jail for pirating my software. The benefit that I get (ostensibly deterrence) is minuscule in comparison to the human cost of a criminal record and even a short stint in jail.
- unfortunateface 12y ago
  I think i made it clear in my comment that I also dis-agree with it being a criminal matter. That was not really the argument I was responding to.

icebraining 12y ago

Parent said more money. They already make money - for example, 2014 was NBCUniversal's most profitable year in its history, and box office revenue in general has been rising.

lugg 12y ago

>> It's all about money. Hollywood is greedy and wants more to create another mediocre (at best) movies. > A business wanting to make money by charging for their good/bad/ok product? how evil. That doesn't follow in the slightest. > I don't agree that copyright infringement should be a criminal rather than civil matter. > Even when I'm watching a mediocre movie, I still appreciate that it took lots of peoples time and money to create. I'm sorry, but I still don't see what you're adding to this thread. It literally is about money. The entire industry does not want their current business model to end because of how profitable it is. It, sadly for them, is a dead horse and has been since VHS. They should have pivoted their model back then, hell, they should have at least seen it coming when napster hit the scene, everyone saw movie copying coming straight after music. Why didn't they? You can appreciate the effort of cogs in an antique machine all you like, but I started lacking all and any sympathy for the lot of them the second they started pushing bullshit takedowns all over the web[1][2]. On making money by charging for their work being evil, no it isn't, not in the slightest. Yet pushing, paying for, and lobbying behind closed doors for the kinds of censorship they are lobbying for, well that is pretty much evil no matter which way you look at it. And them losing, or being unable to make money simply does not excuse that in any way: "No industry gets to dismantle civil liberties with the poor excuse that they can't make money otherwise." [3] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effects http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effects [2] https://www.google.com/search?q=site:chillingeffects.org https://www.google.com/search?q=site:chillingeffects.org [3] https://torrentfreak.com/letter-copyright-monopoly-140921/ https://torrentfreak.com/letter-copyright-monopoly-140921/

unfortunateface 12y ago
My initial comment was a reaction to the sense of entitlement that I sensed in the comment. My response may be out of place in this thread, but no more than the initial comment. If I have mis-interpreted the initial content, then I apologies, but I still don't think I have. Again, I am totally against Hollywoods overreach and attempts to inflict a dying business model by the means described in the article.

nmrm 12y ago

> A business wanting to make more money by charging for their good/bad/ok product? how evil. A business encouraging governments to throw people in jail for something which has never been considered a criminal infraction in order to make more money is pretty evil. I would never dream of asking a government to throw somebody in jail for pirating my software. The benefit that I get (ostensibly deterrence) is minuscule in comparison to the human cost of a criminal record and even a short stint in jail.

unfortunateface 12y ago
I think i made it clear in my comment that I also dis-agree with it being a criminal matter. That was not really the argument I was responding to.