Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why I get my entertainment via BitTorrent

luminarious.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 191 posts

Re: Why I get my entertainment via BitTorrent

#81

Post by wccrawford »

DarkShikari wrote: post #63
rrrazdan wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole system makes eminent sense. Content that has been permitted by the owner is released in your country, when the owner permits. If you are resort to piracy because of this, you are still stealing.

Content that has been permitted by the owner is released in your country, when the owner permits. There is no legal means for someone to restrict where and when I can and cannot choose to view or use content I own, as much as they would love to think so. And they indeed love to think so: I've actually seen companies claim that it is illegal to use the software they sell outside of the country they sell it in . If a m…

And so you can import it, assuming your country's laws permit.

But if you want the content owner to sell it to you directly, you'll have to wait for them want to do so. The reasons for them not wanting to do so could include laws, expenses, or other craziness that you aren't aware of.

Believe it or not, we experience the same crap here in the US in regards to foreign stuff. BBC shows are really popular here, but are usually delayed at best. Trying to find foreign-language stuff is almost impossible.

So while I share your pain, I also know that there's more to it than it might appear at first glance.

Re: Why I get my entertainment via BitTorrent

#83

Post by dorian-graph »

rimantas wrote: post #42
michael_dorfman wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is a form of theft (cf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_of_services ). There's no point in rehashing the semantic argument; it's still theft in the eyes of the law, and while renaming it may help assuage your conscience, it doesn't really add much to the argument.

The law was written way before there was possible to make an exact copy of something while leaving the original intact and way before the cost of such act is so close to zero than even those who have no money to buy original still are able to make the copy. One can apply the same laws, but doing so is stretching them too much. Consider the possibility of you making exact copy of a car just by pressing a button on som…

You have some interesting points and possible scenarios there which seem near altruistic in their style.

What if we consider what I'll deem the 'general public' when THEY download movies, music and videogames? Is their mindset as enlightened as you, myself and others on HN and similar places?

When someone posts on Facebook or whatever the equivalent is (Myspace, ICQ or whatever) for that time period "How do I use x" with x being torrents, Napster or whatever, they seem for the most part to simply want to get something without paying for it.

I can think back then and being the 'computer guy' I'd get asked how to use Kazaa or whatever was popular, right now it's torrents. Why did they want to know? Because they wanted to get something without paying for it and technology simply streamlined that ancient human desire of wanting something for nothing which desire is one of the bases that man ever once stole.

In my younger days I would pirate much though nowadays I have essentially stopped. I would once play the newest games whether I was able to pay for them or not, now I go without, for the time being, like with Portal 2 - I haven't played it yet and I guess I won't till I buy it though I could easily pirate it. Am I 'missing out'? Apparently.. meh. I did recently buy Sparrow, the email client, and it is excellent.

But hey, we all know Linux users are willing to give billions of dollars for good software - the Humble Bundle has proved that. ;)

Re: Why I get my entertainment via BitTorrent

#84

Post by michael_dorfman »

rimantas wrote: post #42
michael_dorfman wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is a form of theft (cf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_of_services ). There's no point in rehashing the semantic argument; it's still theft in the eyes of the law, and while renaming it may help assuage your conscience, it doesn't really add much to the argument.

The law was written way before there was possible to make an exact copy of something while leaving the original intact and way before the cost of such act is so close to zero than even those who have no money to buy original still are able to make the copy. One can apply the same laws, but doing so is stretching them too much. Consider the possibility of you making exact copy of a car just by pressing a button on som…

The law has nothing to do with "making a copy" or "leaving the original intact."

Wiring into the neighborhood cable-tv network without paying is an example of "theft of services", as is sneaking into a movie theater.

Making an illegal copy still takes money out of somebody's pocket. Saying that you wouldn't (or couldn't) have bought the product makes no difference-- the demand is still being alleviated, and non-zero.

Re: Why I get my entertainment via BitTorrent

#85

Post by robryan »

rmc wrote: post #67
mahrain wrote: post #4

Same goes for Holland, this, and TV is very unreliable and a year behind the USA. Plus movies are usually released a few months after the USA.

Ireland aswell. In recent years films have been released much closer to the USA date. I think most of this is due to piracy. If the studios wait a few months, then people will pirate it. Just look at the second Matrix film, that was released on the same date and same time in many countries. The sort of people who would watch The Matrix are the aort of people who are well able to pirate. I believe this is another exam…

Yeah all the SAW films were pretty much worldwide release on the same day.

Re: Why I get my entertainment via BitTorrent

#86

Post by rwmj »

corin_ wrote: post #8
wyclif wrote: post #2

Some of these (I'm looking at you, BBC iPlayer) aren't even available in the USA.

And likewise none of the streaming options for American shows are available in the UK. Now, with American shows, I think there could easily be a good business model - we've seen English TV channels pick up American shows (sometimes running almost in sync with America, more often than not running a year or two behind) with success. Examples include The West Wing, Friends, Glee, Will and Grace, Family Guy, CSI and so o…

iPlayer for non-UK viewers is actually pretty easy to get.

Rent a virtual private server on any of the many UK VPS services. Then use get_iplayer[1] to download TV and radio programmes when you want to.

Although I live in the UK (and pay a TV license), I use this method because it's much more convenient. It doesn't require flash, lets me keep the programme for as long as I want, and downloads are really fast. For example I can grab a 2 hour film from iPlayer into a .flv file in about 15-20 minutes.

[1] http://www.infradead.org/get_iplayer/html/get_iplayer.html

Re: Why I get my entertainment via BitTorrent

#87

Post by ThomPete »

jgroome wrote: post #62
ThomPete wrote: post #16

There is no need to rationalize why you use Bittorrent, there is no argument to win and nothing to defend. It's not stealing, it's not not stealing it's just a fact that people will continue to use bittorrents as long as there is too much friction to get it legally. Bittorrent will be around as long as the content owners insist on localizing copyright and not offering their content to a globally oriented customer bas…

I think that's a bit of an oversimplification. You can use bittorrent to download and watch a film that's been released on DVD. This deprives the content created of a sale/hire/watch on demand, so in theory they lose out on revenue. You can also use bittorrent to download and watch a TV show that was broadcast in another country the night before and that will never be shown on your country's TV network. Think about N…

Legally yes you are right. Philosophically or morally I believe that copyright is based on a premise that is no longer the case.

I recently saw the Product Manager from Spotify give a presentation.

In it he said that spotify users are much more likely to listen to of the charts music when they use spotify. I think he said something like 60 or 80% of the music listened too wasn't chart music.

I seem to remember similar findings with netflix.

In other words when people have to pay for a CD or a DVD they will make the safe choice. But the second there are other options their patterns are different.

In my world at least. There is absolutely nothing philosophically or morally that dictates that it's a right to get paid for something that you can produce once and then mass distribute more or less freely.

It's an opportunity.

The movie industry has no problem replacing jobs previously held by people with machines. They have no problem arguing that people who used to do models with physical materials are just not effective enough. The movie and music industry have no problem distributing their content digitally, laying off thousands of people, closing thousands of stores. All in the name of the progress of technology.

And to be clear I have no problem with that either.

But I just so happen to believe that the same should apply for the record labels and the movie industry.

Just hanging on to old definitions of ownership while ridding themselves of others who aren't following the progress of technology is simply not grounded in anything but lobbyism.

So as long as those industries are not ready to re-considers rights issues while insisting that they should reap the benefits I simply refuse to accept that piracy is in fact piracy in the way it's claimed. I refuse to accept the philosophical premise that is used to define theft, illegal & copyright.

When the underlying reality changes so must the law and regulation. It's there to reflect reality, not the other way round.

Re: Why I get my entertainment via BitTorrent

#88

Post by jgroome »

robryan wrote: post #77
jgroome wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's a bit of an oversimplification. You can use bittorrent to download and watch a film that's been released on DVD. This deprives the content created of a sale/hire/watch on demand, so in theory they lose out on revenue. You can also use bittorrent to download and watch a TV show that was broadcast in another country the night before and that will never be shown on your country's TV network. Think about N…

Wouldn't surprise me either if the ones torrenting end up spending more money on the show that those who catch is casually when it finally does get aired. I've been to concerts where the artist is touring Australia for the first time and hasn't ever done any Australia specific marketing and they manage to fill out venues. Doubt that would have happened before file sharing.

Without a doubt - look at a band like Tool. I don't mind saying that I torrented every one of their albums. Grew to love them, bought the CDs, went to a dozen of their concerts, spent at least £50 on merchandise over the years.

Re: Why I get my entertainment via BitTorrent

#89

Post by archivator »

AlexC04 wrote: post #71
Tyrannosaurs wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iPlayer isn't a commercial service, it's funded by the UK tax payer though the license fee. I agree that this is something the BBC should look at making available more widely as a revenue generator to fund it's operations but it's not a priority for them.

What's the TV license at now? 180 pounds or ~275 US? If it came with access to iPlayer, 4oD & iTVoD I'd probably be willing to pay for a UK TV license. (I'm in Canada)

That's an interesting model - pay the full price for a TV license and only use the web services. There would be technical difficulties, of course (guaranteeing a decent connection to the BBC servers, possibly adding international data centres) but it certainly provokes thought.

On the other hand, how exactly will the government justify collecting tax from non-citizens (even worse, non-residents!)?

Re: Why I get my entertainment via BitTorrent

#90

Post by tomjen3 »

Tyrannosaurs wrote: post #45
Nate75Sanders wrote: post #3

I try to explain this type of thing to people who are ardently anti-piracy: You can never, ever, expect people to miss out on the culture that's happening during their lives. If money, or geography, or whatever is preventing it, they'll still do the best they can to make sure they don't miss anything.

This is true - it doesn't make it right (necessarily) but it is true. The other thing I'd say though is that most people will still operate within their own moral code. In the UK technically platform shifting (transferring music from CD to MP3 for instance) is illegal but that doesn't stop anyone as people see it as a historic oddity and not something which is even remotely morally wrong. It's not uncommon that the s…

Honestly if there is no chance that I ever buy something (say because it is not available for sale) what does it matter if I download it?

I can see the argument for torrent over buy, but not really torrent over nothing.

Post reply on HN