| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
|
|
TheGameNinja
Joined: 07 Nov 2010
Posts: 92
Location: Alabama
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:43 pm
|
 |
|
| maxxjulie wrote: | | yet if i mention i downloaded redline, then it's an all out attack on me from certain people who somehow think they are better. |
| Quote: | | Admitting that he realizes that such an outlook "looks down upon" such individuals, he also suggested that paying fans consider themselves "a rank above" those who don't pay. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Spotlesseden
Joined: 09 Sep 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: earth
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:46 pm
|
|
|
| TheGameNinja wrote: |
| maxxjulie wrote: | | yet if i mention i downloaded redline, then it's an all out attack on me from certain people who somehow think they are better. |
| Quote: | | Admitting that he realizes that such an outlook "looks down upon" such individuals, he also suggested that paying fans consider themselves "a rank above" those who don't pay. |
|
people who don't break the law are always above those who break the law without feeling that they are wrong.
judge always give higher penalty to those people.
Woman fined for about 20k for download music. She challenged the law the fine ended up to be 1.9millions.
If you break the law and just accept that you are wrong, then it's more acceptable to most people.
Last edited by Spotlesseden on Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Soundmonkey44
Joined: 25 May 2010
Posts: 1243
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:49 pm
|
|
|
So...I can go to the pet store now and buy an otaku? I dunno, I hear they are kind of hard to care for, and they don't play well with other animals. I think i'll just stick with my dog. 
I do love this interview though, bascially they guy was as nice as he could be on something like this, probably just didn't want to step on to many toes. 
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Mr. sickVisionz
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 2173
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:55 pm
|
|
|
| Xanas wrote: | | Personally I don't know if he'd agree with the use of the term "steal" based on the way he said what he did. Otherwise he'd be calling them parasites and not pets. |
He actually said that people who purchase anime should think of pirates as pets, not that he thinks of them as such. His opinion on pirating involved an analogy to groping women on trains.
| maxxjulie wrote: | | only in anime some people feel you have to pay for something you've never seen and have no idea you'll even like the least. how silly! |
This is a ridiculous statement considering the percentage of titles sold in the US that are available on legal streaming services in the US.
Last edited by Mr. sickVisionz on Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:09 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
BlackJaded
Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 332
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 1:59 pm
|
|
|
| CG-LOVER wrote: | | Personally, I feel he's being awfully easy on these people calling them "pets". If I were in his position I'd be using some harsher terminology. |
Well I would call my businessmen "rats" for being slimy,seldom and limited on their thinking caps unless they have one.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Polycell
Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Posts: 4623
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:02 pm
|
|
|
| Spotlesseden wrote: | | If you break the law and just accept that you are wrong |
The law is not always right.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
kufirst
Joined: 08 Oct 2010
Posts: 86
Location: Kansas
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:05 pm
|
|
|
|
I personally feel it's all right do both. I pay for online subscriptions galore and the series that I consider worth my money (obviously not titles from Aniplex) but others that I would deem my favorites. Yet I also watch anime unofficially mainly, in my opinion, to follow the industry and to know what I might or might not want to buy in the future.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
BlackJaded
Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 332
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:05 pm
|
|
|
| Spotlesseden wrote: |
| TheGameNinja wrote: |
| maxxjulie wrote: | | yet if i mention i downloaded redline, then it's an all out attack on me from certain people who somehow think they are better. |
| Quote: | | Admitting that he realizes that such an outlook "looks down upon" such individuals, he also suggested that paying fans consider themselves "a rank above" those who don't pay. |
|
people who don't break the law are always above those who break the law without feeling that they are wrong.
judge always give higher penalty to those people.
Woman fined for about 20k for download music. She challenged the law the fine ended up to be 1.9millions.
If you break the law and just accept that you are wrong, then it's more acceptable to most people. |
In America, you can sue the heck out of everyone. It's not about a lesson it's about how much money your gonna save out of your retirement fund.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Mr. sickVisionz
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 2173
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:06 pm
|
|
|
| Polycell wrote: |
| Spotlesseden wrote: | | If you break the law and just accept that you are wrong |
The law is not always right. |
Maybe a law that said women can't vote, but this is a law that says you can't steal someone else's work/livelihood and then distribute it to thousands without getting permission. It's very much a right law.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Polycell
Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Posts: 4623
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:16 pm
|
|
|
| Mr. sickVisionz wrote: |
| Polycell wrote: |
| Spotlesseden wrote: | | If you break the law and just accept that you are wrong |
The law is not always right. |
Maybe a law that said women can't vote, but this is a law that says you can't steal someone else's work/livelihood and then distribute it to thousands without getting permission. It's very much a right law. |
Says you. But there's plenty of people arguing it's as unethical as, say, legalizing pollution in the name of the "common good"(yes, that's how it actually happened).
Which of course just further illustrates my point: if people can't even agree on what's right, how can we assume the law is?
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
configspace
Joined: 16 Aug 2008
Posts: 3717
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:38 pm
|
|
|
|
I like his more realist attitude and appreciate his perspective but I think his arguments with those those weird and frankly not workable examples are kinda weak... this coming from someone who's on the same side.
It's good that he still encourages people to buy and I think he should've focused on that. That someone who downloads but won't buy isn't going to change anything if you criminalize the activity. That is, downloading + not buying vs not downloading + not buying amounts to the same. (notice he mentions buying, not watching on TV or streaming) What I feel he should've focused on is that it would be in the viewer's own self interest to download AND buy.
Furthermore the criminalization of copyright violation doesn't make sense. It's not ethical in the slightest. This is because the act of downloading a copy doesn't intrinsically harm anyone. It doesn't damage property or deprive someone of their possession of it. It doesn't preclude them or others to pay for it. In fact, you cannot even determine if there is a violation or not just from the act! What if you publish a work under creative commons? What if you publish it with attribution required but the person doesn't do that? What if you publish it under no derivatives but the person gives attributions but makes changes? So it varies from no violation at all to different kinds of violation all from the exact same act depending on license. Nothing inherent in the act itself. So if you do want to take a hard line on it, it is still at best a civil matter (similar to contractual disagreements)
Last edited by configspace on Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:40 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
gsilver
Joined: 04 Nov 2007
Posts: 617
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:40 pm
|
|
|
| Spotlesseden wrote: | | What hollywood companies let you preview their their movie before you buy the bluray/dvd? play $10 + gas to watch a movie is not preview. |
I could be wrong, but I've heard rumors of these kiosks called "Redbox" that cost a dollar per movie. It could all be a fabrication, though.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Mr. sickVisionz
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 2173
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:42 pm
|
|
|
| gsilver wrote: |
| Spotlesseden wrote: | | What hollywood companies let you preview their their movie before you buy the bluray/dvd? play $10 + gas to watch a movie is not preview. |
I could be wrong, but I've heard rumors of these kiosks called "Redbox" that cost a dollar per movie. It could all be a fabrication, though. |
Dude, how could renting a DVD for $1 possibly tell you if a movie is worth owning? The only way to tell is by downloading a 8gig 1080p BD rip with lossless FLAC audio for permanent preview storage on your HDD. That's the only possible way of judging a product and it's the only fair way. Suggesting anything else is unethical.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Xanas
Joined: 27 Aug 2007
Posts: 2058
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:50 pm
|
|
|
| Mr. sickVisionz wrote: | |
He actually said that people who purchase anime should think of pirates as pets, not that he thinks of them as such. His opinion on pirating involved an analogy to groping women on trains.
|
Perhaps, albeit I think that analogy is just something he came up with off the top of his head and doubt he was really thinking of it seriously.
| Quote: | |
Maybe a law that said women can't vote, but this is a law that says you can't steal someone else's work/livelihood and then distribute it to thousands without getting permission. It's very much a right law.
|
I don't accept the word "steal" much less a notion about stealing someone's "livelihood." Permission can be a requirement of use if I accept the notion that it's property, but I don't.
The law requires the initiation of coercion against 3rd parties who weren't party to any agreement, including those not directly involved in copying (such as requiring ISPs to provide information on their users).
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
scchan
Joined: 05 Oct 2009
Posts: 143
Location: Exeter, UK
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:56 pm
|
|
|
In responding to the original article: I wanted to say, I am not sure what does it mean by looking at pirates as "pets". Somehow I think the comparison is somewhat like comparing apples and oranges.
I do think the industry does have to take a somewhat different approach PRing against pirates. For now, it is mostly about punishing. I wonder would it be a much better sell by promoting the benefits of paying. Instead calling out parasites, how about saying "Your animator needs cookie money". 
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
