271–280 of 385 posts
If you look at this file here: https://github.com/popcorn-time/popcorn-app/blob/master/js/t... It sends usage data to Google Analytics. I can see how this can translate into you getting caught. Be careful. Even if you don't have a 'trackingId' set it still sends GET requests to http://google.com/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have any continuous contractual relationships with any studios like I do with my employer. Maybe Netflix or HBO would qualify, but they don't charge their customer per unit, so it doesn't really apply here either.
[deleted]
> Downloading copyrighted material may be illegal in your country. Use at your own risk. Have we seriously just stopped considering the ethical implications of such things? At least these sorts of sites used to pretend they were for things like "public domain movies" and "personal backups."
That question has been answered: we have had plenty of piracy for years now -- and do we still have plenty of film/TV/music/book production? Yes! So piracy (at least, as we have known it) is not harmful, in fact it seems almost certainly beneficial economically -- more goods are more widely available.
That just means despite losing "potential income" the industry is still managing to earn money via people who do not wish to circumvent Copyright Law. Or in other words, the number of people not interested in infringing copyright is greater than the number of pirates. That doesn't mean anything other than a majority of people respect copyright law.
>So piracy (at least, as we have known it) is not harmful, in fact it seems almost certainly beneficial economically
Please link to data that demonstrates piracy is economically beneficial to everyone. Since you're claiming 'almost certainly' - I assume you can find hundreds of studies.
Here is my simple thought experiment. Let us say it was impossible to pirate Windows or popular games or tv shows and people had to pay the $100 or w/e it is. Would every single pirate switch to Linux, free games, non-copyrighted entertainment OR Will some of them end up paying the $100?
If reducing Windows piracy means more Linux adoption, I wonder if the Linux cheerleaders would be onboard to reduce Windows piracy :)
How does this work? Is it downloading chunks in order from people, or just starting off doing that, then downloading the rest non-sequentially and streaming that? Is it seeding what it takes? Does it cache complete movies?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So do you tell your boss he is free to pay or not pay you based on his mood for the week? And you are Ok with that yes?
Sorry, but you're not paying the studio for watching a movie. The cinemas are paying the studios for having the right, to charge, whatever they want for you to consume movies. It's the theathers, the netflixs who put the final consuming price on something, you're just paying them, not the guy who worked in the sound system for that movie, or the guy who made the logo of the movie, he was payed, and for sure, not so e…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Movies and music are a luxury item, not an essential. So it is very difficult to construct an ethical argument that supports piracy of newly released works, as there is basically negligible harm to the consumer in not receiving such items for free. (Compare this to, for example, patents on medical products being used to induce scarcity. The stakes here are life and death - so there is a strong ethical case in favour…
I never said that we should receive them for free. Re-read my post. Slowly. Look at MP3s, Napster and iTunes. The Music industry refused to offer digital alternatives leading to Napster. It was(/is) easier to get music for free. Why would I buy a CD with a rootkit on it (look up Sony Fiasco #87), or pay $15 for a CD when I only want one song? Why go to the store when I can get it sitting at home? It was easier to get…
There is no need for such a condescending tone.
Anyway, I don't see how a staggered movie release cycle can be considered unethical. It's not causing you any real harm by having to wait until the film is released on your preferred medium. This is a very poor justification for software such as Popcorn Time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just for fun, apply that logic to your work.
They already have been paid. Or you think mr. sound technician guy or lovely ms. Magda the hairdresser will receive money until his last day just because they have worked on a movie. The only one who will have that right is a company, who had nothing to do with filmaking process, they just invested, and for sure, after the premiere they've got, or not, a lot of money. Even the main actors release "rights".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, but you're not paying the studio for watching a movie. The cinemas are paying the studios for having the right, to charge, whatever they want for you to consume movies. It's the theathers, the netflixs who put the final consuming price on something, you're just paying them, not the guy who worked in the sound system for that movie, or the guy who made the logo of the movie, he was payed, and for sure, not so e…
The less people paying to see a movie equals less movies being made, which means less employment for people involved with making movies.
Actually, in this era more and more tv shows are made because they're a better format than movies and because they're attracting people to consume or pay services. Movies will never dissapear, only the worth making movies will make it and that task would be decided, not by people, but by a middleman.
There's more and more music today than ever, and it doesn't cost 20 dollars or require to be in an store to be accessible to anyone.
Stream for torrents is extremely damaging to the swarm, specially for new torrents. It breaks the protocol and may end up killing itself. Picture a case of major success for this: At Prime Time there is a rush of people streaming from a torrent, acquiring the same pieces of the torrent without servers to counterbalance the upload speed of people with the complete files can't stream the file in real time to a few peop…
I clicked "12 years a slave", a movie I have not yet had an opportunity to watch and it started streaming in less than a minute in high quality. I immediately quit the application as it should not be so easy to benefit from someone else's hard work without compensating them. Please, movie people, let me pay for this. You might kill the cinemas, but you'll still get paid.
They should allow people to buy and stream new releases online. Then, I think they should use theaters for a mix of new movies, and old movies. Run themes, have 80s week, or classic horror movie week, or Star Wars week, or Hitchcock week.