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

Popcorn Time in Your Browser

popcorninyourbrowser.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 262 posts

Re: Popcorn Time in Your Browser

#211

Post by Sir_Substance »

LLWM wrote: post #148
Sir_Substance wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>No one is obliged to give me money -- unless they consume the content I created. At that point, they are. Historically no, they're not. Paying for a concert before you saw it was unheard of 150 years ago, and your ancestors would have considered you a mug for giving over your money before you knew if it was going to be a good show. The norm for human history is that you see the show first and then decide afterwards…

If you get fired before payday, your employer is still legally obligated to pay you for the days you actually did work during that period.

You don't get paid for the time after though.

If I pay for a concert, and I leave 10% of the way in because it's awful, will I get 90% of my money back?

No.

Re: Popcorn Time in Your Browser

#212

Post by chasing »

locokoko wrote: post #210
chasing wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've fallen into the classic trap: No one is obliged to give you free content in the form of movies, music, books, video games, television shows, etc. Just because you can pirate or steal something doesn't mean it's morally or legally justifiable.

well, in this context no one is really "giving", it is there anyway and yours to decide if you just take it or pay for it. In a society where products are intentionally and willingly overproduced to maximize profit (while at the same time trying to dump wages and social securities), the moral boundaries on piracy and/or stealing are getting a bit hazy, at least in my opinion. Of course, the legal situation is pretty…

So pirating a movie is like stealing a car?

Re: Popcorn Time in Your Browser

#213

Post by astalwick »

chasing wrote: post #208
astalwick wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And one last thing: It is actually quite insulting to be reduced down to 'free is better than having to shell out money'. No, it's not. I buy books (audible.com is amazing), I buy music, I buy software - all of which are just as easy to pirate. I go to shows, I buy prints of photographsy that I like, I support artists. I am fully aware of how hard it is as an artist (my wife is an illustrator). So, please don't reduc…

I apologize -- I went off on you as a straw man instead of as someone who had literally just said that they didn't pirate music or software. That was unfair. You touched a nerve. The "I'm not doing any harm" line is the general defense to the piracy question and I think it's very much wrong. I think I'm right in saying that too many people attempt to use it as a moral cover for the fact that they just want stuff for…

Yeah, I totally get that.

And there's definitely a part of me that is biased to "free is better than not-free," so for sure, that's a part of my decision-making process. But unless the content companies actively work to make it difficult for me to consume their content, I try very hard to inhibit that "i can get it for free" mentality.. Precisely because I do know how hard it can be for artists.

Anyway, thanks for the apology (and sorry for getting a bit defensive there). Cheers.

Re: Popcorn Time in Your Browser

#214

Post by npizzolato »

cmiles74 wrote: post #84
martingordon wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this differ from iTunes? There's a business model that works, and the experience is pretty much exactly like Popcorn Time, except iTunes has those pesky Rent/Buy buttons.

The comment compared Popcorn Time to Netflix; I don't think you can really compare iTunes to Netflix (or Popcorn Time). Netflix provides broad access to a range of work for a fixed monthly cost, iTunes is more of a storefront where you can purchase rights. Popcorn Time seems like what many people want from Netflix: a much larger library. Something more like Spotify, but for movies and television.

Yes, people want a library of every tv show and movie, and they want it for free. I'm not sure that's ever been untrue.

Re: Popcorn Time in Your Browser

#215

Post by Sir_Substance »

untog wrote: post #138
dmarg wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>No one is obliged to give you money. Finding a business model that works is your problem, not your customers. This struck a chord with me and is exactly the reason why Hollywood and the Music Industry are flailing. They are trying to continue their business model that worked for so long into this new day and age. Adapt or die essentially.

But what is that new model, exactly? If "paying money in return for receiving goods" doesn't work, how will they make these multi-million dollar cultural phenomenons? I agree that the current system is broken, but saying you'll pirate until the studios work out it feels like an irresponsible point of view, to me.

One of the key problems that studios are having is overinvestment.

When you're investing hundreds of millions in your movies, and tens in your tv shows, the bar is set very high.

Now, when the distribution of that content required factories and fleets of trucks, it funneled all the money in the world into a small number of operators, because the cost of entry was so high, so very few people could operate in that space. That allowed very high investments, because the worlds disposable income was being split between a small number of people.

Today, the cost of production and distribution has dropped like a stone, and there are more players as a result. However, these companies are still investing like it's the 1970's.

Lets be clear here: Total number of films released in 1970: 1967 http://www.imdb.com/search/title/?release_date=1970&title_ty...

Total number of films released in 2014: 7320 http://www.imdb.com/search/title/?release_date=2014&title_ty...

It's not a monopoly any more. Small studios can beat big ones. It's not about finding a different way to charge the customer, it's about restructuring your investment strategy.

Re: Popcorn Time in Your Browser

#216

Post by Nadya »

martypitt wrote: post #121
Sir_Substance wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've fallen into the classic trap: No one is obliged to give you money. Finding a business model that works is your problem, not your customers. Forced lock-in is a model, but it's a violent one that makes people want to leave, and it's entirely predicated on there never being an escape hatch for your trapped customers. There is now an escape hatch for content customers. They're no longer beholden to the choice of…

No one is obliged to give me money -- unless they consume the content I created. At that point, they are. Anything else assumes that because content exists, people have the right to consume it -- for free if they can work out how. Let's be clear: I fully agree that Hollywood needs to catch up, and make content accessible in the way that Popcorn time has. But I don't have the right to consume content illegally, just b…

I feel this black/white scenario of "pay us for content or its illegal" ignores the reality of the market. There are plenty of social dynamics in play that are conveniently ignored.

Music pirates in particular tend to buy more music than non-pirates. I would wager this holds true in any media-field of pirating (but perhaps not software pirating). [0] There is a reason for this!

Pirates are enthusiasts. They love the content they consume and are likely to pay/buy things they really enjoy/enjoyed. Due to not having an unlimited income they pirate some things. For music pirates - there is a good chance that the music they are purchasing is from the same music label as the music they are pirating.

Pirates are also likely to tell their friends about a show they enjoyed. Pirates are also likely to buy merchandise from shows they enjoy.

For example - an extremely large portion of the American market for Japanese Anime-related goods is because of pirated fan-subbed anime. Shows that would have never been released or heard of in America and thus led to 0% revenue from America are pirated and their merchandise purchased. The number of figurines from おれいも for example. Or the number of だきまくら purchased from American-fans.

This simply can't be denied for the anime market in particular - and many fansubbers eventually get hired by the studios. Some studios try to shut down the fansubbers but most allow it to happen because fansub groups largely do not sub anime slated for an English release. It's an unspoken code of sorts of "Support the official release" - and since many anime fans don't necessarily speak Japanese, if someone isn't translating it for them they can't/won't watch it.

Pirating is beneficial for the anime scene. It's likely more beneficial than harmful for music for similar reasons. I'll concede that for Movies/TV Shows it gets a little iffy (do enough people buy merchandise who wouldn't if they hadn't pirated the show to see it?)

Then we can also look at video games. Amnesia: The Dark Descent or Minecraft. Games that were heavily pirated and the creators even went so far as to say "If you can't afford to play our game. Pirate it." Why? Free marketing and free publicity means more sales. It made economic sense to let your game go viral that way. What might be $20 in a lost sale to a pirate might win you $80 in 4 new sales from his friends (even if another 6 of his friends just pirated the game)

If you don't let him pirate the game you just lost $80 in sales and free marketing/publiclity from 7 people which likely lost you even more in sales.

Which brings me to the important part: Pirating doesn't mean a lost sale. It means free marketing and free publicity from someone who wouldn't have been a customer. If you can convert a "non-sale" to a "promotional consumer", why wouldn't you?

The economic spin usually given to pirates is it is "costing sales" which is, frankly, bullshit. They make more money off suing mass pirates than any "lost sales", so it's beneficial for them to keep pirating illegal.

[0] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/22/music-pirates-study...

Re: Popcorn Time in Your Browser

#217

Post by what_ever »

zuron7 wrote: post #127
DigitalSea wrote: post #7

You know the traditional business model of Hollywood is well and truly broken when an open source application like Popcorn Time comes along and does everything right. What Popcorn Time has done by making accessing content on demand easier than ever before is nothing short of impressive. They're the Netflix of piracy and I think Hollywood can learn a lot from Popcorn Time (but as history has proven, they won't).

The west at least has apps like Netflix to legally watch movies. In countries like India, the only legal options we have are YouTube and a bunch of smaller companies with a small collection of Hindi Movies (<10000 movies). You want to watch Hollywood? You're best off buying a DVD for 6$, which for a country like ours is a lot of money.

Seriously? $6 is a lot of money in India? A ticket in a movie theater costs more than that in India these days.

Re: Popcorn Time in Your Browser

#218

Post by Sir_Substance »

bdcravens wrote: post #185
jmcmichael wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...whatever business model I pick. Would it be a good thing for society to allow you to pick a business model where you blare your music from loud speakers and then pay large burley men 50 cents to collect 1 dollar from anyone within earshot, on the premise that they heard your music so thus owe you?

I've never accidentally watched Game of Thrones, or unintentionally been within earshot of it - I had to explicitly choose to include that programming.

Really? Your social life must be non-existant. I'm not exactly a party animal and I've caught clips of it dozens of times and friends houses.

Re: Popcorn Time in Your Browser

#219

Post by Lawtonfogle »

astalwick wrote: post #171
martypitt wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it a surprise? No. What you've described is downright annoying. It seems nonsensical to me that hollywood makes it so difficult for me to give them money to watch Game of Thrones. But, Piracy isn't a form of protest, any more than stealing a car is -- regardless of how reasonable you consider the price.

Laws aren't all equal. Stealing a car is zero-sum: if I take your car, you no longer have a car , which is a very, very expensive toy. If I download Game of Thrones, the outcome for every single person in the world except me is exactly the same as it would have been if I had simply gone and read a book instead. HBO gets no money (I'm reading a book), and you still have the ability to watch GoT (I haven't done anythin…

If you would've otherwise read a book. Had the ability to pirate not been available, a non-zero number of individuals would've paid. Hollywood is stupid thinking everyone would have otherwise paid. But anyone who insist that everyone pirating would've read a book instead is making the same mistake.

Re: Popcorn Time in Your Browser

#220

Post by Sir_Substance »

chasing wrote: post #166
Sir_Substance wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've fallen into the classic trap: No one is obliged to give you money. Finding a business model that works is your problem, not your customers. Forced lock-in is a model, but it's a violent one that makes people want to leave, and it's entirely predicated on there never being an escape hatch for your trapped customers. There is now an escape hatch for content customers. They're no longer beholden to the choice of…

You've fallen into the classic trap: No one is obliged to give you free content in the form of movies, music, books, video games, television shows, etc. Just because you can pirate or steal something doesn't mean it's morally or legally justifiable.

I'm not after free content, I'm after accessible content.

This discussion is basically about how content industries, with all their clout, are somehow unable to match the usability of some dudes with a bit of spare time.

Post reply on HN