No, this isn't about links, lol no need to close this thread mods

this thread is bout the current status and future of online piracy

yeah, Megaupload is gone, but, is there life after Megaupload?

what about sites that allow to download (instantly) full movies from youtube, for example? what about other sites (there are many) like Megaupload? why are those still alive and well? or what about the p2p? is p2p unbreakable? it's been 15 years (nearly) since Napster... does the gov really need 15 years to shut down just TWO sites? laughable...

or is this about quality? why has Adele sold more than 10 million of PHYSICAL copies worldwide? Rihanna sells millions of digital singles but why can't she sell a physical copy of her albums to save her life? (exaggeration)

and what about the industry? will it completely (finally) change in order to fully embrace the digital world? what's the future of Cds, DVDs and Blu-Rays? are you tired of those long-ass hours you need just to create and account for iTunes or WindowsLive?

do U usually download stuff? are U a pirate? how do U feel about it?

discuss

[Edited 8/15/12 12:24pm]

[Edited 8/15/12 12:25pm]

What do I think?

I think the RIAA can kiss my black ass...AFTER...I've consumed milk based products because I'm Lactose Intolerant!

Why? Youtube...BET UNSUNG...and just take a real LOOK at what the RIAA bitches crying about file-sharing...have actually done to the ARTISTS...that MADE the music industry!

As for the RIAA and their misguided PUPPETS...that want to think "the internet is dead" be putting their "sheriffs" and watchdogs out to take it down.

NWA said it best!

musicology54 said:

Where did you find prince's new album cover?

You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.

Spiro T. Agnew.

When they shut down Megaupload someone on the net listed about 15 other sites for which you can download pretty much anything. :shrug" I think it's a never ending shell game and the entertainment/music/publishing community will never stamp piracy as they'd hope. I read somewhere Monday that Google has an agreement with the music/entertainment industry they'll block or remove any site on their Chrome caught sharing the industry intellectual property.

I still like to support artist, I hope those I support can crowd out the bs that's being made today. But I still share and get music from friends. Folks burning me Cd's and send stuff via email. Hell, the DVD/CD now takes orders on music you are looking for and will be at the beauty shop with it on a flash drive for your next vist. The music industry waited too long. now many people think art/music is free.

With a large percentage of music being out of print those fools give people an excuse to go searching for it on the net.

[Edited 8/16/12 15:20pm]

JoeTyler said:

and what about the industry? will it completely (finally) change in order to fully embrace the digital world?

Why would they do that? People forget that not everybody has a computer or know how to use one. Others don't have credit cards, so can't buy stuff off of the internet, unless the company accepts money orders. My mom still buys cassettes. A few record companies still manufacture them and sell them through mail order. Some even put out 8-tracks. I still buy records and don't download.

musicology54 said:

Where did you find prince's new album cover?

[Edited 8/16/12 14:43pm]

[Edited 8/16/12 14:43pm]

think it is weird now? wait until 3D printers are more common.

i've never stolen a download. i'm willling to pay for product i like

[Edited 8/17/12 16:43pm]

I'm behind.

Haven't had any music amplifier,/cd/mp3/digital player, speaker in my house for a while now.

I hope I can pay some workers for my new house, so at least, I can get the kitchen installed and have water/electricity/gas etcetera.

Than I hope I can safely move there, and by the time I have a bed and other pivotal furniture,

I'll try to gather money for music gear.

So, I've been pretty much without music for the last couple of months.

I hope to surround myself with music in 6 months from now.

Any good advice about what kind of stuf I should invest my money in?

How can the U.S. government shut down internet piracy?

Most sites have simply set up servers outside the U.S. where the U.S. has no jurisdiction.

SUPRMAN said:

How can the U.S. government shut down internet piracy?

Most sites have simply set up servers outside the U.S. where the U.S. has no jurisdiction.

oh if that was true. But that is not the point. What they can do is pressure US ISP to collect data on trassfers of data from targeted sites.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

How can the U.S. government shut down internet piracy?

Most sites have simply set up servers outside the U.S. where the U.S. has no jurisdiction.

oh if that was true. But that is not the point. What they can do is pressure US ISP to collect data on trassfers of data from targeted sites.

Pressure how?

I download movies (not those in theaters, though, I think that's odd), music, comic books and books.

I also pay to go to the movies and I buy A LOT of movies, music, comic books and books.

Some people are like me, straddling the line. Some people download everything and pay for nothing. Some people pay for everything and refuse to download anything illegally.

IMO, unless the internet ceases to exist, that's the way it's going to stay. So long as downloading is a possibility, there will be people on all sides of the issue doing what they're most comfortable with. Even if they start prosecuting and fining everyone for each file they illegally download, there will always be somebody working on a new way to block big business and government from "seeing" what we're doing.

There is no going back.

[Edited 8/17/12 21:05pm]

SUPRMAN said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

oh if that was true. But that is not the point. What they can do is pressure US ISP to collect data on trassfers of data from targeted sites.

Pressure how?

harassment... if you are playing one of your google lawyer...overly picky semantic game do not bother you are aware the Fed gives the providers and even google a hard time about this issue.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

SUPRMAN said:

Pressure how?

harassment... if you are playing one of your google lawyer...overly picky semantic game do not bother you are aware the Fed gives the providers and even google a hard time about this issue.

Uh no I am not. Make me aware please. ?

Yeah, let's not bother with facts. Opinions are so much easier to believe.

Piracy has already reshaped the entertainment industry oustide of television and cable channel material. That's why most movies and music is really dumbed down and "test market" greenlit. That's why you get music that seems generic being pushed with trendy production techniques that don't break any molds and also why you get reboots, tie-ins, and sequels at the movies.

It's because they don't make the same kind of money on the smaller more unique stuff because of pirating.

ufoclub said:

Piracy has already reshaped the entertainment industry oustide of television and cable channel material. That's why most movies and music is really dumbed down and "test market" greenlit. That's why you get music that seems generic being pushed with trendy production techniques that don't break any molds and also why you get reboots, tie-ins, and sequels at the movies.

It's because they don't make the same kind of money on the smaller more unique stuff because of pirating.

Agreed and that's why the quality of music and movies have declined.

The idea that piracy will ever be stopped, is laughable.

You don't even NEED those sites to download content from YouTube; there's browser add-ons that will do it right for you as you're watching it if you click on them.

And Megaupload is no victory for them whatsoever because as soon as it disappeared, new sites started popping up. And they went after 4shared and that means jackshit because I still have no problem stumbling upon other sites where you can get whatever the hell you want, for free. Books, movies, tv shows...whatever.

They'll never be able to stop it.

kewlschool said:

ufoclub said:

Piracy has already reshaped the entertainment industry oustide of television and cable channel material. That's why most movies and music is really dumbed down and "test market" greenlit. That's why you get music that seems generic being pushed with trendy production techniques that don't break any molds and also why you get reboots, tie-ins, and sequels at the movies.

It's because they don't make the same kind of money on the smaller more unique stuff because of pirating.

Agreed and that's why the quality of music and movies have declined.

naww. we are just getting older and harder to impress. Also we are more aware of what all comes out... it is time that filters out quality. There is also the illusion that Hollywood is out of ideas. That is based on the huge amount of squeals and movies based on books. But many great movies started out as books. Iconic movies like Star Wars (yes there was a novel that came out in 1976 but that was based on the screenplay) may well be the exception.

OnlyNDaUsa said:

kewlschool said:

Agreed and that's why the quality of music and movies have declined.

naww. we are just getting older and harder to impress. Also we are more aware of what all comes out... it is time that filters out quality. There is also the illusion that Hollywood is out of ideas. That is based on the huge amount of squeals and movies based on books. But many great movies started out as books. Iconic movies like Star Wars (yes there was a novel that came out in 1976 but that was based on the screenplay) may well be the exception.

Intellectual property infringement was supposedly costing the U.S. economy $200–250 billion per year, and had killed 750,000 American jobs. you can make a good claim that's an exaggeration, but even if you take away a zero from the estimate number... it's quite a blow.

I personally know directors, special effects supervisors, and actors that have had projects evaporate in Hollywood as the ropes are tied tighter and tighter around only one goal: to finance and produce movie types that makes a profit quickly through hype and pre-existing interest as opposed to a slow burn that grows (which is how the original blockbusters of the 70's worked). And that's because the money is getting tighter, and your profits on a slow burning original work are less reliable as a return.

Look at these blockbusters of the 70's: The Godfather, Star Wars, Jaws, Close Encounters, Superman, Rocky, The Exorcist.... there's no stars (outside of old Marlon Brando) cast as the leads, and the stories were all high risks that they had no idea would become so popular. In each case they thought they were making a specialized genre movie. Sure, two of those were based on best selling novels, but they still weren't planning on the numbers that say the production of "Twilight" is counting on. And in each case they were handing the the reigns to young upstart directors who were not even using the traditional studio staff for production, often running way of schedule in pursuit of their unique vision.

These days there are groundbreaking movies like Blair Witch, or Paranormal, (which follow the same pattern as the incredible 1974 Texas Chainsaw) and something like "District 9" is made with the same admirable philosophy as those big movies from the 70's. But outside of that, most movies are predictable machines. I personally don't think The Avengers is that great (the story completely sucks, while the character details/humor are good). I think it's a huge "Emperors New Clothes" phenomenon that works. It makes money from a business standpoint.

The more artistic mainstream high budget cinema is happening now on cable on AMC/HBO type series. A big risky Hollywood movie from the 70's like "Network" or "Reds" is now translated to television (which, thank god, is now HD and in surround sound). "The Newsroom" is kind of like a friendly version of "Network" in the beginning, but it keeps going.

I know so many friends who tell me that they just download a movie, or watch it on a streaming bootleg method. They don't go to the theater, they don't pay for cable, they don't rent the movie or buy it. Same goes for albums. So if I were to survey just my crowd as a test, I would say it's quite obvious they are not spending money for something that was designed to have a price.

It's getting to the point where I'm thinking that when I try to market my first indie feature, I will have to try to use the bootleg world to my advantage and forget about the traditional routes of finding someone to distrtibute your first micro budget movie. In other words, kind of like how a free album might point the way to paying for a live performance, maybe I can have a free movie that I distribute for free point the way to something people would pay for, like a book series, or a delux blu-ray with a book. I dunno.

But hey, maybe I'm wrong!

Editor: How has investment in film productions fared in recent years, and have studios picked up more of the tab? Has investment by individuals fallen off?

Burke: The studios have always picked up most of the tab. When you consider who is responsible for funding the budgets of films on an annual basis, the studios are responsible for 85 to 90 percent, and, frankly, the other 10 or 15 percent is skewed by a couple of independent pictures like Twilight that make a great deal of money.

Since 2005, the studios have all taken on major co-investment partners – not individuals who are investing in one or two pictures, but investors who, depending on the studio and on the slate, have invested 25 to 50 percent of the production costs of most of the studio's films. Some of the larger equity funds participated in deals done between 2005 and 2008, when we saw the economy starting to get shaky.

Has investment by individuals fallen off? The answer is yes, and the reason is that the business now requires larger equity bets to be made on a particular film. You used to be able to finance a film independently and have a fairly limited exposure at the end of the day, as in my example of a $20 million film where you had $15 million covered by other benefits and your exposure might be $5 million or less. Today's risk profile involves equity exposure of closer to $8 to $10 million on a $20 million film.

Editor: What changed?

Burke: The foreign presale market is not as robust as it was. Now, foreign distributors around the globe are more likely to say, I bought too many pictures at the greenlight stage, and I didn't get my money back because the quality was not as promised, so I'm going to wait until I see the finished pictures before I buy them.

Independent producers promise that they're going to get domestic, meaning U.S., distribution, which is important because the studios spend a lot of money on marketing when they distribute pictures.

The average marketing budget for an MPAA picture in 2010 was about $40 million, and when you spend that kind of money on a picture in the U.S., the marketing effort travels a long way. You get the Entertainment Tonights, the Access Hollywoods, the news programs – affording exposure worldwide, so the distributors in France, the UK, Germany and elsewhere don't have to spend as much on marketing. In prior years, people were much more likely to buy a picture that didn't have a U.S. distributor on board – on the expectation that U.S. distribution would be in place by the time the picture got finished and delivered. In many cases, that expectation was not met because the studios have become much less willing to pick up third-party product to distribute and, instead, focus more on their own internal development. They've concluded that they have more success with the pictures they develop internally, and if they're going to spend $40 or $50 million marketing something, they want the best possible shot at producing a hit.