Forum

I bet he has a fancy looking car,no doubt.Nice work Zac,Attacking from all sides until the answer to the "'Crunchyroll cuts you a check"leaked out.Was this in person?Was he smug or innocent about it?I went and looked at the site.It's quite an insult to everything people have dreamt and bled for.They are leading a lot of kids on,in thinking this is alright.

Hmmm...the beginnings of CR's streaming distribution are technically not legal but even home video distribution got its start in some instances from shady beginnings. The prime example is ADV, which started from Matt Greenfield who was a kid running around Clear Lake, TX making fan distributions of content that obviously wasn't his and from John Ledford whose shop specifically dealt with gray market materials.

Most of the time it's easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission. Especially if you are trying to prove a product or method can work.

In the case of digital music distribution, the original Napster was as illegal as you could get, but it revealed the true potential of digital distribution and led the way to legal services like iTunes. Frankly, if the music companies hadn't been so narrow minded and compromised with the original Napter to share profits instead of destroying it, there probably would be less of a hodgepodge of music sites (legal and illegal).

Some of the interest from companies (i.e. Gonzo) in sites like CR come from lessons learned from other industries.

Essentially, the bigger picture is not "Copyright Law and You!" but how can industries and artist take advantage of any distribution system (regardless of its beginnings).

mk2000

Dargonxtc wrote:

Well I went to the front page of CR for the first time in my life. It looks like they are thinking of putting manga on the site. Confused

I hope they handle it with as much respect and high standards as they do everything else.

You know what's funny about people criticizing the streaming quality of Crunchyroll? It's almost as if they have better alternatives. Now I'm sure people are going to disagree with me. Just a thought.

Dargonxtc wrote:

Oh and the about section has a grudge against uppercase I's. That might have been a contributing factor to the question of Shinji's age.

Are you suggesting that the interviewer stated that question because he thought the site owner and author of that about section is a retard who can't follow simple grammar rules at his age? A drop of ad hominem in an interview? Wouldn't that make the rest of the interview a chain of logical fallacies? No way.

I do apologize if I start making more and more rude comments. Feel free to take my posts down anytime.

Greed1914 wrote:

And I also don't see how them requiring donations was anything like VHS fansubbing since the fansubbers do the work and Crunchyroll just hosts it.

Now, that strikes me as historical revisionism. Back in the days of VHS there were fansubbers who sent out VHS copies but unlike digital files there's a limit to how many VHS copies you can make with a home setup. So there were also quite a lot of distributors who took the work of fansubbers and made copies for the price of tapes & postage. So the dynamics haven't really changed all that much. Just the scale.

Shuchung wrote:

Are you suggesting that the interviewer stated that question because he thought the site owner and author of that about section is a retard who can't follow simple grammar rules at his age? A drop of ad hominem in an interview? Wouldn't that make the rest of the interview a chain of logical fallacies? No way.

I do apologize if I start making more and more rude comments. Feel free to take my posts down anytime.

You're attempting now to invalidate the entire interview because I asked how old Shinji is?

This is what's published on the site under the "about" section:

Quote:

what is crunchyroll?
it's hard to describe what it is because the site changes so fast but throughout all of crunchyroll's changes, i've noticed one thing that's always constant - it's a community of awesome, passionate people~! the people are what make cr rock~ =D i've met so many interesting and helpful people who i can call friends now. so look around crunchyroll.com to meet people - hang out in the chatrooms and forums! i read tons of interesting threads everyday (even though i dont post much myself anymore...too busy these days)

why did i make crunchyroll?
i've always liked making websites, so one day i just randomly made crunchyroll for fun. it was created for me and my friends, but now it's grown into something i never really expected. originally i just wanted crunchyroll to be a cool place for people to hang out, but hopefully crunchyroll can do something pretty big and awesome someday -.-

have a great day~!

gg,
shinji

So in light of this text, you think "how old is this guy?" is an unfair question in light of the fact that his website just received $4 million in venture capital funding and at one point was pulling in over $70,000 a month in donations alone?

Shuchung wrote:

You know what's funny about people criticizing the streaming quality of Crunchyroll? It's almost as if they have better alternatives. Now I'm sure people are going to disagree with me. Just a thought.

I don't know if people are so much criticizing the streaming quality; it might be more, oh, the illegal, money-grubbing quality of it all.

The point about the "about" section on that site is that they are obviously trying to make it look like it's run by some kid out of his bedroom or something when it is clearly nothing of the kind and never has been from the start.

Shuchung wrote:

You know what's funny about people criticizing the streaming quality of Crunchyroll? It's almost as if they have better alternatives.

I have a whole wall of them. [wasn't talking about stream quality anyway]

Quote:

Are you suggesting that the interviewer stated that question because he thought the site owner and author of that about section is a retard who can't follow simple grammar rules at his age? A drop of ad hominem in an interview? Wouldn't that make the rest of the interview a chain of logical fallacies?

No, that would just be me. And to be frank, I have zero problem, using any kind of attack on the likes of these slugs. Anything less than an oversize boot in there ass is more than they deserve. So you can take your Phil101 terminology and eat it for all I care.

Last edited by dtm42 on Tue Mar 25, 2008 2:19 am; edited 2 times in total

I am surprised at the reactions that some people have been displaying towards this interview. What did you think would happen? You thought that this person would be completely free and frank with their replies, divulging company secrets on a whim? Amateurs. Whether or not he is a politician, crook or a businessman (and he would fit into the latter two categories), all three groups have one thing in common: a tendency to be evasive.

Politicians don't want to lose the next election (or perhaps wish to win the next one, a big difference).

Crooks don't want to go to jail.

Businessmen don't want to divulge trading secrets and company practices, thereby ruining their reputation and their money cows.

If you have ever listened to an experienced New Zealand Cabinet Minister on Nine to Noon (the premier radio news show here), you will have noticed the dance that both the interviewer and interviewee partake in. Both parties involved know more than they are prepared to say, and try to outfox each other. The interviewer wishes to trip the Minister into saying something embarrassing, primarily by making them contradict themself. The Minister merely wishes to survive the mandatory public grilling that is inevitable with the latest public outcry.

"Oh, farmers in the Waikato are in the midst of the first drought ever, we must roast alive the Minister of Agriculture for not paying the weather gods".

On a more serious note, the Irena Asher furore was a major headache for the Minister of Police.

So was the Electoral Finance Bill, which was intended to regulate donations to political parties for elections, but in theory allows for the Government to stack the Election funding rules in its favour.

Anyway, there was only ever one realistic course the interview could have taken, and take it it did. Zac fulfilled his role by coming out swinging, and Vu Nguyen was tight. If he didn't simply refuse to answer a question, he regurgitated the same old lines. But honestly, what was he supposed to do? Yes, he is a staff member of a service I frankly do not like at all. But, now that he got into such a position, he didn't have many options.

To finish off, it was a boring interview. The only interviews that get interesting occur when one side screws up their assigned role. Since Mr. Nguyen is a crook but not a large fool, we got the old standby. This is not to say that the interview should never have taken place.

One more thing, though. If they can block content permanently, why not go through every single episode of Naruto and Bleach (and the rest of the licensed lot) and block them? I guess that their concern for legitimate companies and the fansubbers is just a façade. Now I have even more reason to dislike them.

Zac wrote:

So in light of this text, you think "how old is this guy?" is an unfair question in light of the fact that his website just received $4 million in venture capital funding and at one point was pulling in over $70,000 a month in donations alone?

So instead of calling him an idiot, you're now calling him a cheat. The question remains the same, how do you convince me, the reader, to believe in the interview you personally constructed, when you clearly has a more than necessary biased view against the interviewee? Of course I'm just one man, and most readers here would place their trust in you because of your reputation. But I feel like I should voice my opinion anyway.

Shuchung wrote:

Zac wrote:

So in light of this text, you think "how old is this guy?" is an unfair question in light of the fact that his website just received $4 million in venture capital funding and at one point was pulling in over $70,000 a month in donations alone?

So instead of calling him an idiot, you're now calling him a cheat. The question remains the same, how do you convince me, the reader, to believe in the interview you personally constructed, when you clearly has a more than necessary biased view against the interviewee? Of course I'm just one man, and most readers here would place their trust in you because of your reputation. But I feel like I should voice my opinion anyway.

Completely unbiased interviews are not exactly interesting reading material, and you can't get important answers by asking objective, generic questions that nobody objects to. The interviewer has to push to get an answer, or else it's a total waste of time.

And yes, I do place my trust in Zac. Somebody involved with a legitimate site like ANN is always going to get the benefit of the doubt from me when compared to somebody involved with a site like Crunchyroll.

Shuchung wrote:

So instead of calling him an idiot, you're now calling him a cheat. The question remains the same, how do you convince me, the reader, to believe in the interview you personally constructed, when you clearly has a more than necessary biased view against the interviewee? Of course I'm just one man, and most readers here would place their trust in you because of your reputation. But I feel like I should voice my opinion anyway.

I didn't call him anything at all. I pointed to the text and interpreted it as any reasonable and rational adult would.

You seem to feel that it's unethical or somehow irresponsible for me to ask - repeatedly and doggedly ask, I might add, which may be fairly construed as uncouth - the important, obvious and overwhelming questions about morality and legality in regard to the interview subject. I would submit that I would be remiss in not asking those questions, given my task. It is not my duty to "appear unbiased" to those seeking an interview that ultimately does not assign any sort of responsibility to anyone, but instead my responsibility is to ask the important and obviously overwhelming questions that have been made crystal clear on multiple forums, blogs, and in my own email inbox since the company's venture capital announcement.

Dargonxtc wrote:

Quote:

Are you suggesting that the interviewer stated that question because he thought the site owner and author of that about section is a retard who can't follow simple grammar rules at his age? A drop of ad hominem in an interview? Wouldn't that make the rest of the interview a chain of logical fallacies?

No, that would just be me. And to be frank, I have zero problem, using any kind of attack on the likes of these slugs. Anything less than an oversize boot in there ass is more than they deserve. So you can take your Phil101 terminology and eat it for all I care.

Haha amen to that, and I'm actually taking Phil101 this semester myself. Laughing

Greed1914 wrote:

Completely unbiased interviews are not exactly interesting reading material, and you can't get important answers by asking objective, generic questions that nobody objects to. The interviewer has to push to get an answer, or else it's a total waste of time.

I agree, I don't think that there's any other way this interview could have gone about if any worthwhile answers were to be given at all.

As much as I don't like Gonzo or anybody doing business with CR at all you can't deny how hilarious the comments are on their site from people that I assume to be kids or people from other countries that don't seem to understand what it means for a show to be licensed.

And for everybody refering to Vu Nguyen as Mr. Nguyen, hey my last name is Nguyen. Sad

Greed1914 wrote:

Shuchung wrote:

So instead of calling him an idiot, you're now calling him a cheat. The question remains the same, how do you convince me, the reader, to believe in the interview you personally constructed, when you clearly has a more than necessary biased view against the interviewee? Of course I'm just one man, and most readers here would place their trust in you because of your reputation. But I feel like I should voice my opinion anyway.

Completely unbiased interviews are not exactly interesting reading material, and you can't get important answers by asking objective, generic questions that nobody objects to. The interviewer has to push to get an answer, or else it's a total waste of time.

And yes, I do place my trust in Zac. Somebody involved with a legitimate site like ANN is always going to get the benefit of the doubt from me when compared to somebody involved with a site like Crunchyroll.

You are not reading my post the way I intended. I added the phrase more-than-necessary for a reason. I understand that people have their own views, and it would be unfair to ask them to be completely unbiased. However, there are texts that shouldn't be taken seriously, such as political propaganda. I regretted to use the word propaganda to associate it with this interview in any way. I don't think this interview is as bad as a propaganda, but I do hope that it was formatted better, more carefully, so that it would be more convincing and informational.

Zac wrote:

I didn't call him anything at all. I pointed to the text and interpreted it as any reasonable and rational adult would.

Now I'm just wondering what you interpreted the text as, out of curiosity.

Xevo wrote:

Ok, most of the story that I read, was complete bullsh*t. I mean, at the beginning he said that all the money went to the site. And at the ending he suddenly says that their team gets a paycheck of Crunchyroll..?

According to him originally all donation money and adverising money went to support the site. Now that they've gotten VC money and are hiring a full-time staff he gets a paycheck. Is this hard to understand? He may be scum, and he may be avoiding the issue but I don't believe he was outright lying in the earlier points of the interview.

Xevo wrote:

And also about the filtering, that was bullsh*t too. I'm a site builder myself and it is impossible too filter movies out that have been uploaded before. You need a volunteer/worker for that too keep track on it. because you can easily change the name of the video file and title when your uploading.

What? Can't just take an MD5 sum of the video and add it to a blacklist? Sure people can get arround that if they modify the file but people who deliberately do that can be easily banned and the exact same file will never be able to be uploaded twice.

I don't quite get how they can quit their jobs to work on the site without drawing a check from the website. That's quite a disconnect there.... I guess they must have good soup kitchens and homeless shelters that grant them internet access.

Forum - View topic
Interview: Crunchyroll's Vu Nguyen

That Time I Got Reincarnated as a Slime: The Ways of Monster Nation Manga Ends Due to Artist's Health

Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire Dips to #3 in 4th Weekend, SPY×FAMILY Film Debuts at #5 at U.S. Box Office

Dead Dead Demon's Dededede Destruction Part 1 Anime Film Review

Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes Game Review

The ANN Aftershow - What Anime Should You Watch Part 2 (Spring 2024)

Classroom of the Elite Season 3 Anime Series Review

Forum - View topicInterview: Crunchyroll's Vu Nguyen

Forum

Forum - View topic
Interview: Crunchyroll's Vu Nguyen