61–70 of 141 posts
Popcorn Time previously just showed open domain films in the screen shots. The new one has pictures Game of Thrones and company. It looks like they have stopped pretending this is not for piracy. edit: clarification
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> It's ridicioulous that people need to be afraid to release stuff but sadly enough this is the case. I'm conflicted on this. The MPAA abuse their power regularly but it's hard to deny it's now easier and cheaper than ever to access and watch movies. That takes away a lot of the justification for piracy and creating tools that facilitate it. Edit: And here come the down votes. Don't down vote if you disagree with so…
Anecdotal evidence alert. I live in the UK. On Sunday I wanted to watch the new Fargo TV show. I do not own a Television. I went to watch it 'live' on the Channel 4 website. It kept saying my broadband wasn't good enough. Odd. Googled a bit, ah - adblock is causing issues. This needs a new whitelist compared to 4od - fine by me. Sit through 2 minutes of adverts specifically over the web player (bearing in mind the ch…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's like crossing the street. You might legally have the right of way. Pragmatically however, you need to get out of the way of the moving car.
Or jay-walking. Legally should should walk to the crossing at the end of the block. But pragmatically you could just run across the road during a lull of traffic.
[0] I could be completely wrong, and given the international audience I am probable both right and wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or jay-walking. Legally should should walk to the crossing at the end of the block. But pragmatically you could just run across the road during a lull of traffic.
I thought jay-walking was specifically crossing against the lights at a controlled intersection. If there are no lights (within ~20 metres) it isn't jay-walking...[0] [0] I could be completely wrong, and given the international audience I am probable both right and wrong.
[1] http://peds.org/issues/respect-pedestrians/pedestrian_right_...
Someone posted a really good article on the being right vs being pragmatic - about it being a service problem as opposed to an ethical one, or something like that. It'd be really handy if someone could post it.
You're probably thinking of this article by Marco Arment: http://www.marco.org/2012/02/25/right-vs-pragmatic
To me the problem is that they cannot control distribution. So one solution could be baking adverts into the tv/movie. Has the obvious flaw of poisoning art with advertising, but if done well might work?
What does everyone else see as the pragmatic solution?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're probably thinking of this article by Marco Arment: http://www.marco.org/2012/02/25/right-vs-pragmatic
I 100% agree with this approach but what does it imply for the TV/Movie industry? To me the problem is that they cannot control distribution. So one solution could be baking adverts into the tv/movie. Has the obvious flaw of poisoning art with advertising, but if done well might work? What does everyone else see as the pragmatic solution?
My ideal pragmatic solution would be a platform (or two, or five) that acts like a dumb pipe for content providers to license their content to, and receive some form of compensation every time it is watched, prorated into the amount of the episode/movie is actually watched.
However, given the difficult licensing issues found for every country, that's probably not going to happen any time soon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Morality" is self-defined. No doubt they have their interpretation of morality on their side.
Sure, but many share a similar definition of morality. More to the point, the economics are not relative to a point of view. Their project can only succeed, as it stands, if it is used marginally. If everyone used it instead of the competition, content creators would have to change the way they work drastically, and no new content would show up on PT.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but many share a similar definition of morality. More to the point, the economics are not relative to a point of view. Their project can only succeed, as it stands, if it is used marginally. If everyone used it instead of the competition, content creators would have to change the way they work drastically, and no new content would show up on PT.
There are many more economic models than pay-at-the-point-of-use, so its not clear at all that the project would fail.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought jay-walking was specifically crossing against the lights at a controlled intersection. If there are no lights (within ~20 metres) it isn't jay-walking...[0] [0] I could be completely wrong, and given the international audience I am probable both right and wrong.
As with most regulations like this, in the US it depends on the state. In Georgia, for example, you cannot cross the street outside of a crosswalk anywhere between two light-controlled intersections, but everywhere else is pretty much fine [1]. These laws have led me to act in such bizarre ways as crossing the street against the signal once all the traffic has passed but walking a couple feet outside of the crosswalk…