moblog uk

viktor's moblog

by viktor

user profile | dashboard | view on map

« older newer »

To view my other moblog, click here

Recent visitors

Do you torrent?

(viewed 2207 times)
Bookmark and Share
Show on map
13th Oct 2009, 11:38   | tags:,,,


bethmadethis says:


13th Oct 2009, 13:09

MandyP says:

Too true.

13th Oct 2009, 14:26

can I just put my hand up and offer the minority's view that, for example, if I did download films I would only download those which I would not go and see at the cinema anyway. Cinema visits are extraordinarily expensive these days and are saved for big screen necessary films only. this is just like the music debate i.e. i would only ever download music to save myself buying rubbish CDs, if i loved an album i would always want it to have and to hold. hmm. damn the majority.

13th Oct 2009, 14:26

viktor says:

Hi, i dont really beleive the statement, i just thought it'd be a cool picture to take. My film viewing cost me £10 last night - surely that is too expensive?

13th Oct 2009, 14:28

nige says:

I buy a monthly pass to my local multiscreen, but they still don't show every film I'd like to see (which are mostly those that are channelled to smaller arthouses).

Mark Kermode has an interesting take on torrents killing cinema. He doesn't believe it either, but he believes that technology is driving distribution, and that the consumer should be offered the choice to view the latest films using other methods than just the cinema (online / at home).

13th Oct 2009, 15:18

MandyP says:

I have to agree that the industry hasn't kept up with technology but I also have to say that downloading black-market torrents is stealing. Even if it seems harmless.

13th Oct 2009, 15:44

I think even £7.50 which it costs at my local is pretty expensive, I always go on Orange Wednesdays... one day they're gonna stop doing that promotion and I am going to cry. And Nige, I also have that problem too, my local only shows the big ones, didn't even get Moon :(

13th Oct 2009, 15:47

Wendle says:

How much cinemas charge is stealing.
I just do not go to the cinema any more at all. Full stop.
I download some, but only once the dvd has been released so that if i like it, i can buy it. And watch it again. And again. Whenever i want. In bed.

13th Oct 2009, 16:00

nige says:

I watch a lot of films at the cinema so it is much cheaper to get a monthly pass (even if you watch two a month it's worth it at current prices). Another bad thing about the high ticket prices is that the owners also make you sit through advertising as well, and that is disgusting.

I had an interesting conversation with a friend of mine who is also against downloading foreign TV shows off the internet. He considers it stealing, but then he also TiVo's entire shows from ad-supported networks using a "series link" feature and then ffwds through all of the advertising. I don't see much difference between the two methods (unless the download is coming from a subscription-only network, like HBO).

edit: And mscm, I was lucky enough to see Moon at my multiplex, but we didn't get Antichrist, for example.

13th Oct 2009, 16:35

Wendle says:

Also, just to be pedantic;


13th Oct 2009, 16:53

MandyP says:

It's still taking money out of someone's pocket for a product they created -

theftn. the generic term for all crimes in which a person intentionally and fraudulently takes personal property of another without permission or consent and with the intent to convert it to the taker's use (including potential sale).

13th Oct 2009, 17:00

Wendle says:

The unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted or patented material.

We're talking about piracy, not theft.

13th Oct 2009, 17:06

Twiglet says:

Have no interest in joining the argument but let me tell you this. Unauthorized use of say, my car, would be theft as far as I'm concerned.

13th Oct 2009, 17:11

Wendle says:

Yes, beacuse your car is not copyrighted or patented material.

13th Oct 2009, 17:17

Twiglet says:

No, but it's mine and unauthorized use is theft.

Where do you think the word piracy comes from? Do you think the word refers to a legal act?

Apologies Viktor for hijacking your thread.

13th Oct 2009, 17:19

Wendle says:

Let me clarify.
I am not trying to say downloading film/music/games/etc is not illegal.
I am simply being pedantic (as i said when i first brought this up.)
Piracy is piracy. Calling it theft is to over dramatise the whole thing.

13th Oct 2009, 17:20

viktor says:

The legal definition of theft is to permanently deprive someone of something. So if someone took your car and never returned it - that would be theft. If someone took your car for a drive, or joy ride, never intending to permanently deprive you of it, then that's not theft. :p

13th Oct 2009, 17:22

Twiglet says:

In your opinion Wendle which you are entitled to. Just as other comment makers and the makers of films are entitled to theirs.

Apologies again Viktor. I'm leaving the thread.

13th Oct 2009, 17:23

Wendle says:

It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of definition.

13th Oct 2009, 17:25

viktor says:

Woah this has got a bit heated ey! Chill out dudes, go watch a film or something ;D

13th Oct 2009, 17:28

Kandan says:

What I want to know is, why bring god into this?

13th Oct 2009, 17:44

MandyP says:

13th Oct 2009, 18:27

Loving Wendles cartoon explanation..

As for me I was a massive pirate. I was probably one of the first to be threatened with legal action in England by the Americans some six years ago !

For all of that I don't do it anymore. One of my friends who is still heavily into downloads often feels let down when he watches a poor quality version and is left at home when a group of us make an outing of going to see an epic in true Massive screen style ...

13th Oct 2009, 20:00

Caine says:

Fab shot, V. I don't torrent at all. Never have. These days, it's all Netflix. I have a hard time in a cinema because of my back; and North Dakota isn't exactly a mecca for Indie or foreign films. I'm rarely interested in the latest piece of "blockbuster" hollywood crap that gets play around here.

13th Oct 2009, 23:02

The prevalence of piracy is merely an excuse to jack the prices. Like the context of being trapped in a cinema house is merely an excuse to charge people $6 for a tub of sugar-water that only costs $.25 to produce and deliver and chill and also will, incidentally, guarantee that the purchaser has to miss a scene for a trip to the loo.

The truth is that the distribution of poor-quality copies to the internet merely allows a large chunk of people who would have never ponied up the funds to see the movie at the cinema in the first place to hype the film to their cinema-going friends, thereby increasing attendance -- at least for films worth watching. Many production houses either leak their films themselves or turn a blind eye when it happens, at least for a couple of weeks, just for the extra exposure and press in blogs and forums.

The MPAA and RIAA, on the other hand, are their own damn organizations, and the lawyers they have suing everyone right, left, and center get to keep a percentage of fines and settlements they bully the court system into collecting for them. That money doesn't go to the artists or actors or writers or, more than a tiny trickle, to the production houses that (provably incorrectly) claim that piracy reduces revenues. That money goes to the law firms, who are pretty much on autopilot and lobby various legislative bodies often with only an ignorant rubber-stamping from the RIAA/MPAA or production companies for whom they are claiming to claim damages.

I say this as an author and someone who would some day love to have the sale and licensing of copyrighted material be his sole source of income. But the truth is every time I give away free ebooks I make more sales than I would have without making my work available to those who probably couldn't have have worked the cost of my book into their budget.

The other truth is that piracy is still (thanks to lobbied legislatures) emphatically illegal, even if it's bad for business (unless you're a lawyer, collecting your percentage of the fines and settlements) that it be so. That's why I usually make the effort to make sure the stuff I release is properly licensed for free distribution so the people who download it don't have to worry that they might be committing a criminal (or at least unethical) act.


14th Oct 2009, 01:24

Puddlepuff says:

Ah, remember the bootlegged cassette tapes in the 80's. I still have boxes full of live concerts,....

14th Oct 2009, 07:27

taniwha says:

I haven't fact checked this but I seem to remember that most Hollywood films don't make money at the cinema. They rely on a few must-see blockbusters to cover the costs of others (if someone knows better though, let me know).

I've recently started returning to the cinema fairly judiciously to see big screen events and 3D movies but apart from that watch at home. Companies need a new distribution method. For example, to what extent has Spotify changed the torrenting habits of music downloaders?

14th Oct 2009, 10:52

Ed Jackson says:

Most cinemas (not the Prince Charles) are shit and need to be put down like a sick dog.

14th Oct 2009, 14:34

Rich says:

That's true, it has to be a film I really want to see for it to be worth 2 hours of spinal damage from their shitty seats.

14th Oct 2009, 14:41

Jane Doe says:

Here's what a real director thinks of piracy, and how they turned to other distribution methods, including mobile phone technology:

13th Nov 2009, 13:09

Add a comment

(P) what's this?

Track updates to this post with rssthis rss feed