OnlyFans drops planned porn ban

Post by devilduck » Thu, Aug 26, 2021, 4:13 PM UTC

birdyrooster wrote: post #872

e40 wrote: post #686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had completely stopped downloading movies in 2018, and even for that year, I downloaded very few. I had been tapering off since 2015. These are real numbers from my NAS. I got a seedbox 2 months ago. This was my last straw: trying to rent some movie on Amazon and was told I had to subscribe to some service to watch it--there was no price to watch it once. The other things I did recently: 1) paused Google YTTV becau…

Went to watch Beavis and Butthead on Amazon and it had no music videos... They were all edited out. How is that remotely acceptable?

Post by CobrastanJorji » Thu, Aug 26, 2021, 5:13 PM UTC

kipchak wrote: post #974

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked on GameTap! Old ROM websites at the time had these click-through agreements that would say things like "you may only download these ROMs if you have explicit, written permission from the publisher" and I may be on of the only living people who've clicked one of those "I agree" links in good faith. Technically, GameTap had some really neat little features. For example, it would track your high score for most…

Reading back I definitely come off a bit too harsh on gametap - It was a good service from the start. but I remember it seeming like there was trouble figuring out a pricing/content model that worked, as you said a lot of people who were excited for those sorts of games are often able to download roms as well. I think it may just have been ahead of it's time in terms of model in the era of battlepasses, paid online a…

Post by Nilef » Thu, Aug 26, 2021, 6:50 PM UTC

jrm4 wrote: post #982

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #933

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It strikes me the best cure is to restrict copyright to force federation - if you sell to one company who retails to consumers in a geo locality then you're required to make available to any company at that price. Streaming services would be forced to compete in everything except content. Creators would still be paid. Copyright isn't a natural right, it should be continually adapted to serve the public. What are the…

This presumes piracy is bad. Which I'd say is mostly true, but I'd go so far as to suggest that, e.g. Spotify is worse. Essentially, they both mean that creators don't meaningfully get paid, only that Spotify appears legitimate due to the breadcrumbs and "exposure" they do give out. E.g. Bandcamp is better than piracy, but I'd argue piracy is better than Spotify.

Post by _carbyau_ » Thu, Aug 26, 2021, 10:45 PM UTC

matheusmoreira wrote: post #811

jstanley wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is piracy of games for a 20-year-old console a problem? Is anyone still selling new games for those consoles?

Because copyright holders like the idea of reselling the same games to you hundreds of times. Nintendo resells the exact same games to people every time they launch a console. Companies create low effort compilations all the time. You'd think they'd make their money and move on to new creations. You make something, it's successful, you make your money for 5 years or so and then it's public domain. You'd have to make…

Post by _carbyau_ » Thu, Aug 26, 2021, 11:24 PM UTC

jandrese wrote: post #756

Mindwipe wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's difficult in some cases but demand is absolutely the main driver. Much like Netflix, the reality is that people aren't actually very interested in old shows apart from a handful of super famous perennials which are already available anyway. They say they are in surveys, but consumer behaviour does not back that up. They just use newer content in practice.

There is always interest in old shows, but not enough to deal with the licensing issues. You could have much wider libraries if the licensing was less of a nightmare.