Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes? Companies are made up of people and have founders who are "actual people". He also acted as an artist in various positions within his company (producer, actor, director, writer, animator). On the whole, his copyrights were owned by the company, though. He died in 1966, and that has no bearing on when copyrights owned by the Walt Disney Company will expire. Who, specifically, is that 1928 copyright still encourag…
My point was that copyright is not going away after the holder dies if the IP is transferred to a company.
The Long, Slow Decline of BitTorrent (2017)
521–530 of 546 posts
Re: The Long, Slow Decline of BitTorrent (2017)
#522Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What’s your proposed solution? Tell the studio they can only sign deals with global distributors? Tell them to accept less money? Stop signing exclusive deals with regional distributors. If you're going to put something on Netflix, put it on Netflix world-wide. That doesn't mean you can't also put it on a streaming service based in France that concentrates on French language movies -- do both. Let them each pay you…
Distribution rights for huge back catalogs were sold to third party local to a given country/region distributors long ago. There's a lot of entropy there, and each has exclusivity to control distribution for the given region. It's not that easy to work away from. Which is why Netflix has been paying more to create or co-create content (most Netflix content isn't world-wide exclusive it seems).
Re: The Long, Slow Decline of BitTorrent (2017)
#523There is a trend now that the encodings are larger. A 110 minute movie can be anywhere from 5 to 10 gigabytes or more in full high def. Sometimes you can find newer movies in smaller sizes; sometimes not.
Downloading and storing that is inconvenient compared to streaming. It takes longer; less powerful mobile devices don't decode the large stuff very well; you may get skipping if you happen to view these huge downloads over shitty Wi-Fi in a crammed airspace.
An 0.8 to 1.5 gig download is still a reasonable alternative to streaming.
I was traveling back in January and crammed 16 movies into as many gigs of free space on the 32 gig SD card on my tablet for watching on planes and in hotel rooms. I did that by running almost each one of them through ffmpeg to get the bitrate down. In some cases I tweaked the resolution. In one or two of them, I re-coded the audio to a lower bit rate (256 kbps to 128: it wasn't a musical movie, WTF!) Almost no perceptible loss of quality; all perfectly watchable.
Pain in the butt to do that, though!
Basically, I have this theorem that two hours of a perfectly watchable movie with good sound do not require more than around 1.5 gigs of H265+AAC data. When I see larger sizes, I tend to become kind of reluctant to pull the download trigger.
Re: The Long, Slow Decline of BitTorrent (2017)
#524Earlier quoted context omitted.
Give me an example of something that is ethical but unfair, or fair but unethical
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_of_Solomon is unethical but could be considered fair (with respect to the putative mothers, if not the baby).
Re: The Long, Slow Decline of BitTorrent (2017)
#525Earlier quoted context omitted.
Problems: - Company hires a bunch of artists to make something, pays them one time, keeps gathering checks decades after the artists are dead, and even longer after they're getting any payment for the work. - Artist collects money from their work, dies, and the estate continues collecting for decades. The purpose of copyright should be to encourage artists to create works for the enrichment of society as a whole, by…
The time limit on copyright seems to be just an inefficient form of taxation. If Disney keeps copyright of Snow White the government can tax Disney's extra profit to pay for cancer research. Isn't that more socially useful than giving everyone the right to watch Snow White on YouTube for free?
This is an appeal to emotion. It's not very honest to cherry pick a nice sounding example. How about taxes spent for wars and so on?
> Isn't that more socially useful than giving everyone the right to watch Snow White on YouTube for free?
The money that people saved by not paying disney do not disappear. They will be spent, perhaps on cancer research, or something else.
Re: The Long, Slow Decline of BitTorrent (2017)
#526Putting Kodi under "Streaming Piracy" is pretty inflamitory. Kodi isn't there to enable streaming piracy. (There are non-offical plugins that do that, but they've made many announcements about Kodi's stance on Piracy)
But let's be honest, 99.99% of Kodi and Plex use is purely for pirated content. Otherwise, I'm not sure where everyone is getting all these non DRM digital downloads. And most aren't using special plugins with Kodi, they just use Kodi to play their content they get from torrents and Usenet.
Re: The Long, Slow Decline of BitTorrent (2017)
#527Earlier quoted context omitted.
The law/studio deals have to change. Netflix offers great movies and they lock it down to certain countries. For example I am big fan of Back To The Future. I can watch may favourite movie every month when I'm in UK but when I am in Poland then no luck. Same goes in other direction. While being in Poland I downloaded via Netflix National Lampoon Animal House to watch on plane. I watched half of it on plane then tried…
You can use playon cloud [0] which is an online dvr service for sites like Netflix, Hulu, etc. They appear to be legal which is good. [0] https://www.playon.tv/cloud
Re: The Long, Slow Decline of BitTorrent (2017)
#528I can't read the article because the website is down. But I have something to say about torrenting movies. Late last year, my old parents who don't speak English came to visit me for a couple of months in the US. I'm just a graduate student with a limited budget, and my mom is car sick so we couldn't go out every night. I didn't want them to waste time on Facebook after dinner until we went to bed, so I had to think…
Torrenting for me has always been about convenience, not money. I recently wanted to watch a new show called A.P. Bio. It's free on NBC's website. But after struggling through one episode with lags and ads with no volume control, I gave up and just torrented the show. Until they master such exotic technologies as "streaming video" and "volume control" they're going to keep driving people to torrenting. Netflix figure…
Re: The Long, Slow Decline of BitTorrent (2017)
#529Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Distribution rights for huge back catalogs were sold to third party local to a given country/region distributors long ago. There's a lot of entropy there, and each has exclusivity to control distribution for the given region. Which is another reason not to use regional licensing going forward, and pass laws to disfavor it in general. It increases transaction costs -- then when Netflix or any of your hundred other b…
> Which is another reason not to use regional licensing going forward, and pass laws to disfavor it in general I'm curious what your proposed legislation would be. Just outlaw exclusive licensing? Would you prohibit vertical integration between content producers and distributors or just force vertically integrated companies to license content to competing distributors? How about a distributor that has an inherent mar…
A big thing would be to just discontinue legislative support for it. Get rid of any law preventing third parties from circumventing region locks, so that major companies can overtly thwart them.
Then you can get a "tell Netflix I'm in..." selector from your ISP or bank and the problem gets solved by the market itself.
Re: The Long, Slow Decline of BitTorrent (2017)
#530Earlier quoted context omitted.
Add an English and Spanish audio language. It's really not hard. The real problem is that because it's closed-source software, the user must rely on the creator to think of every edge case.
It would be so much better if the user could just watch the encrypted video feed in just any player they want (provided they interface with a libnetflix library...)
The only reason I have left to pirate a movie that is available to me on netflix is to get more stable playback, the ability to play slightly faster, and the ability to use Smooth Video Project.
It's obvious that DRM-based platforms have driven TV manufacturers to implement expensive frame-interpolation into their displays, when it can be done much more efficiently at the decoder level, on machines where it makes sense to already have a fast GPU. This is the thing I find most frustrating with this situation.