Popcorn Time – Watch torrent movies instantly • Hacker News Board

Re: Popcorn Time – Watch torrent movies instantly

#351

Post by chrismcb » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 6:36 AM UTC

ds9 wrote: post #264

JPKab wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a left of center guy, but this kind of thinking is a very ugly slippery slope. Its not that anyone should always expect to pay for things that are beneficial, its the fact that people who very recently WORKED to create the very thing you are benefiting from should be PAID for their work. If everyone followed your logic, we wouldn't have 12 Years A Slave. The props cost money. The costumes cost money. The cameras…

"Its not that anyone should always expect to pay for things that are beneficial, its the fact that people who very recently WORKED to create the very thing you are benefiting from should be PAID for their work." Why did the camera, props, lighting and other workers contribute to the movie, if they weren't getting paid? How could they afford to? In reality, of course, only the movie companies, some writers and a few b…

While B didn't agree to pay, B wanted to watch the works, (and C and D and and and) If B and C and D don't pay, then next time A won't make anything, and everyone loses.

Re: Popcorn Time – Watch torrent movies instantly

#352

Post by chrismcb » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 6:39 AM UTC

nightski wrote: post #301

Zikes wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A cameraman's salary is paid by the movie's budget, which is effectively a loan against the projected future earnings of a film. Sure the cameraman already got paid for the film you just pirated, but if said film doesn't earn enough then the studio will decide to make fewer films or go bankrupt, either of which could cost the cameraman their job and significantly reduce future earning potential.

But if the movie wasn't worth any money to said person in the first place, then maybe it isn't such a big loss. Maybe some just do not value cinema entertainment very much even though they may watch a movie.

It might not be worth any "money" BUT it was worth something to the person who pirated. As they watched the movie. It had SOME value to them.

Re: Popcorn Time – Watch torrent movies instantly

#353

Post by chrismcb » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 6:42 AM UTC

tymski wrote: post #224

JPKab wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a left of center guy, but this kind of thinking is a very ugly slippery slope. Its not that anyone should always expect to pay for things that are beneficial, its the fact that people who very recently WORKED to create the very thing you are benefiting from should be PAID for their work. If everyone followed your logic, we wouldn't have 12 Years A Slave. The props cost money. The costumes cost money. The cameras…

I guess you're unaware of independent films. 12 Years a Slave would absolutely be made, regardless of a non-blockbuster budget. There are always going to be people trying to make art or assist in doing so, without the intention of making an absurd amount of money. Why do these actors even need millions for a movie? Its an absurd amount that is more than necessary.

That is a different argument. Why do actors "need" millions? Because the movie makes millions. Perhaps the problem is the cost of the individual ticket is too high? While there are some good independent films, many aren't very good. Generally (at least to me) a high quality hollywood blockbuster is more entertaining (and more polished) than a low budget film. I'd be fairly disappointed if we lost the blockbusters and only had low budget amateur films left.

Re: Popcorn Time – Watch torrent movies instantly

#354

Post by chrismcb » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 6:45 AM UTC

meerita wrote: post #223

minikites wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The musicians/recording engineers/conductor/support staff don't deserve to be paid?

Well, this is a big debate. I think musicians must be paid by playing live, amd not when every human listen a song, do a cover, or listen it in a bar. I think artists should be credited and pay when others use their creation for commercial use. Staff, as always, they will have jobs. You think the staff is all day working with the records, no, they do sound work on live shows too, as welll producers, designers, print…

If that is the case, why would any entertainer allow themselves to be recorded? And who would bother to waste the time and money to make the recording? I don't have the time nor desire to go to a concert, yet I enjoy listening to good music. Therefore I pay for it.

Re: Popcorn Time – Watch torrent movies instantly

#355

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 7:31 AM UTC

JPKab wrote: post #144

quadrangle wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it should not be so easy to benefit from someone else's hard work without compensating them. Nonsense. I benefit from the work of Mozart and feel no need to compensate anyone. There are real issues with funding mechanisms and creative work in a shareable digital world, but we can reject the idea that you should always pay for anything that is beneficial. If you want to give gifts to creative folks you like, you can…

I'm a left of center guy, but this kind of thinking is a very ugly slippery slope. Its not that anyone should always expect to pay for things that are beneficial, its the fact that people who very recently WORKED to create the very thing you are benefiting from should be PAID for their work. If everyone followed your logic, we wouldn't have 12 Years A Slave. The props cost money. The costumes cost money. The cameras…

[deleted]

Re: Popcorn Time – Watch torrent movies instantly

#356

Post by ksk » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 7:56 AM UTC

hxa7241 wrote: post #334

ksk wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>we have had plenty of piracy for years now -- and do we still have plenty of film/TV/music/book production? Yes! 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…

As Landes and Posner say in 'The economic structure of intellectual property law' (Conclusion, p422, s3) (2003): "Economic analysis has come up short of providing either theoretical or empirical grounds for assessing the overall effect of intellectual property law on economic welfare." And that is echoed in various other economic comment in later years. So there is an uncomfortable lack of research. Now, the main pur…

>And that is echoed in various other economic comment in later years. So there is an uncomfortable lack of research.

Seriously? You use the words "almost certainly" and are now trying to weasel out when simply asked to back up your statement? The correct response when you don't have data is to say - I don't know at the moment.

>So given both that model and the lack of evidence, to say an increase in availability of goods, with a still strong level of production, is a good thing, seems very reasonable, does it not?

Lack of evidence is just proof of lack of evidence. You don't get to make any wild assertions because they sound reasonable in your head. And even if you do, you have to qualify them with the appropriate words - you don't get to say "almost certainly".

>What does that even mean? Really, what?

Perform my thought experiment.

> If people buy more coffee machines and make coffee at home, perhaps coffee-shop owners are going to say they are losing 'potential income'. Oh no! we had better ban the use of coffee-making machines!

Thats a rather childish way of twisting my argument. It has nothing to do with the topic at hand and does not deserve a response.

>The law is not there to ensure certain businesses make as much money as they think they should. (Well, sadly it currently is, but it ought not to be.)

If you don't like the law, get it changed. What have you done in that regard?

--

There is a solution for your problem that doesn't involve breaking laws just because you don't like them.

1) Support artists who put out their work in non-copyrighted form. Perhaps they could have a new model like kickstarter for music/movies/games with people pledging money.

2) Help reduce piracy of copyrighted material and get people to support above artists.

3) The vastly increased sales of those artists will attract even more artists to that model creating a nice feedback loop.

4) Copyrighted forms of entertainment will diminish in their importance and the MPAA/RIAA could perhaps cease to exist.

Re: Popcorn Time – Watch torrent movies instantly

#357

Post by camillomiller » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 9:00 AM UTC

dombili wrote: post #244

chucknelson wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It shouldn't be my responsibility to try to get these movies legally Ignoring that statement, which is a nice way to excuse your obvious criminal act(s), despite the correctness of the situation, paying these fees is fine when it's only a few, but the key is that we need centralized services to offer everything easily. If every content creator starts to have their own distribution method, get ready to complain abou…

>Ignoring that statement, which is a nice way to excuse your obvious criminal act(s) What's your suggestion, then? Should I refuse to consume them or force myself to go to cinema even though I don't want to? (nor have the time to do so.) I'm all ears. >the key is that we need centralized services to offer everything easily. If every content creator starts to have their own distribution method, get ready to complain a…

iTunes was criticized as a Monopoly, but it frigging revolutionized the music business. Steve Jobs, who first of all was a super music buff if there was one, wanted exactly this. Easy accessibility. He started with compromises (DRMs and so on) and then moved on to make the giants crumble down to the current obviousness of ubiquitous music access. Ten years later we need something that large and global, but for the movie business. It's harder and Steve's not around to kick movie executives asses anymore, but a service like Popcorn Time is very useful: they show exactly what people want and they should be a ringing bell for the movie industries. That's the way to follow, movie folks: do it or die painfully.

Re: Popcorn Time – Watch torrent movies instantly

#358

Post by talmir » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 9:23 AM UTC

meerita wrote: post #242

sosborn wrote: post #173

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".

I imagine that the fact that the regular worker has already been paid is not the big picture here.

If every movie is stolen or given away for free, this reduces the incentive to create more big pictures that would keep giving these people jobs.

Eventually this could possibly lead to fewer people getting paid much needed money due to fewer productions happening.

Re: Popcorn Time – Watch torrent movies instantly

#359

Post by throwwit » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 10:06 AM UTC

qiemem wrote: post #67

watty wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The MPAA already has the ability to view torrent seeds, why would they waste so much resources to create this?

Honeypot, but that doesn't hold up since torrenting movies is so wide spread already.

But just in time for TPP deliberations.

Re: Popcorn Time – Watch torrent movies instantly

#360

Post by quasque » Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 12:46 PM UTC

quadrangle wrote: post #342

quasque wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends what they are sharing. Sharing copyrighted works without the authorization of the copyright holder is the common definition of piracy. In which case, how is it unethical (as you say) to equate the two?

Because "piracy" is a slur that equates sharing to attacking ships and stealing cargo and threatening or even killing people. The implication in copyright-infringement = piracy is that when you share something, you are an aggressor actively attacking the copyright holder. It's complete garbage and shouldn't be tolerated. Sharing is the complete opposite motivation from stealing. We want to encourage sharing and oppos…

Of all the things to be incensed by on this topic, the fact that words have more than one definition (with the copyright infringement meaning going back to at least the 18th century[1] - it's not a recent derivation) has got to be the most bizarre. I honestly can't tell if you're joking or not.

[1] http://books.google.com/books?id=Bs0DAAAAQAAJ&q=piracy