youhavedownloaded

[Whiskey 7]

Hi. We have no records on you.

I should think not

[Eraser]

Most of the arguments I've seen here in favor of warezing movies/music/games are just plain and simply flawed.

Exactly my thought. If Adam Sandler's next movie is on a torrent site I'll probably download it just to see how bad it is, because I certainly will not be giving him my money in a theatre. But for movies that actually seem like they have a chance of being good I'll go watch it in a theatre like a good little consumer whore.

So just because a movie is, in your opinion, shit it gives you the right to steal it? How about the option of not watching it at all because, after all, you know, it's shit?

For games, despite rarely having done it before unless I wanted a DRM-free version

I hear this one a lot as well. But the reality is that if you don't agree with DRM measures, then you shouldn't bother with the game to begin with. DRM is not justification for an illegal download. In your mind it may be, because the game publishers who do this piss you off (and you're right to be pissed off) but ultimately, it's better to not touch the game with a 10 foot pole instead of downloading it. Because in the end, downloading will tell the publisher that you actually do want the game, so next time, they'll apply even stricter DRM because they believe that will prevent you from downloading their next game so you'll buy it.

Half the money you spend on products don't even go to the people who actually created it anyway, especially with music.

So instead you download so the artist don't get anything at all? I agree that buying directly from the artist is infinitely better than having men in suit take the biggest part of the pie, but downloading music isn't going to help solve that situation. Especially not because the RIAA is run by people with incredibly thick skulls who just have no idea how to properly run a music business.

For everything else, it's strictly try before you buy

While I can understand this sentiment, it's still wide off the mark. Do you feel the same about physical products? Do you feel that a book store should give you a copy of the latest Harry Potter to see if you actually like it? And at what point do you decide you didn't like it? After having read the book up to the second-to-last page? And if you didn't like it, are you even going to return the book? And if you did like it are you still going to buy it (be honest here)? And all this without any form of insurance towards the bookstore keeper?

You know, I agree with a lot of sentiments here and more often than not it's exactly what Gabe Newell said: it's not a money issue, it's a convenience issue. For me personally, I haven't illegally downloaded a single game since Steam and finding relatively cheap online XBox game retailers. I haven't illegally downloaded any music since I've discovered Spotify. I rarely downloaded movies, but now I never do that because mostly I just buy them or rent them through the XBox Zune service. And there's the convnience thing coming again. If we had Netflix or something like that here in the Netherlands, I'd be using that to get movies instead.

And I don't want to sit on an ivory tower and act like I never ever download anything anymore, because that's not true. I downloaded Game of Thrones. I downloaded The Walking Dead. I downloaded The Borgias. But not because I thought they weren't worth money. It is because there is simply no other way for me to get them. That in itself, I realize, is also no justification for illegally downloading those series, but for me it is true that if I could just access those in a legal, convenient way, I'd do that instead.

[MKJ]

the latter is true. I downloaded the new Lost ep every week because moron networks wouldnt air them until 6 to 12 months after.
when they were released on DVD, however, I went out and bought them. S4 is still sealed I think.

[Ryoki]

You know, I agree with a lot of sentiments here and more often than not it's exactly what Gabe Newell said: it's not a money issue, it's a convenience issue. For me personally, I haven't illegally downloaded a single game since Steam and finding relatively cheap online XBox game retailers. I haven't illegally downloaded any music since I've discovered Spotify. I rarely downloaded movies, but now I never do that because mostly I just buy them or rent them through the XBox Zune service. And there's the convnience thing coming again. If we had Netflix or something like that here in the Netherlands, I'd be using that to get movies instead.

And I don't want to sit on an ivory tower and act like I never ever download anything anymore, because that's not true. I downloaded Game of Thrones. I downloaded The Walking Dead. I downloaded The Borgias. But not because I thought they weren't worth money. It is because there is simply no other way for me to get them. That in itself, I realize, is also no justification for illegally downloading those series, but for me it is true that if I could just access those in a legal, convenient way, I'd do that instead.

I agree with this, especially the thing about games and music (not at all insensative to 4days' point about the games industry making products that would be unacceptable anywhere else, but downloading games was always a techincal hassle too big for me to handle...)

Different story for films and series though, until the industry catches up to modern consumer demands i'll say fuck em and download what i want when i want it.

[brisk]

So instead you download so the artist don't get anything at all? I agree that buying directly from the artist is infinitely better than having men in suit take the biggest part of the pie, but downloading music isn't going to help solve that situation. Especially not because the RIAA is run by people with incredibly thick skulls who just have no idea how to properly run a music business.

No, you've completely misunderstoof this. Literally all labels/artists i'm interested know that you need samples before you buy, so they provide them via their website/bandcamp etc.. I rarely have the need to pirate music anymore, simply because it's usually cheap enough anyway and I know exactly what i'm going to be buying, before I actually buy it. The only exception is for out-of-print releases that are impossible to buy anymore on vinyl/cd/tape etc..

While I can understand this sentiment, it's still wide off the mark. Do you feel the same about physical products? Do you feel that a book store should give you a copy of the latest Harry Potter to see if you actually like it? *long rant including the usual cliche analogies that have nothing to do with digital distribution*

Books can be read in libraries for free. Physical media products are just a shell for the digital content anyway. I still buy vinyl because I love the packaging, but the actual music is the same. Games don't even bother with manuals anymore, since all content is literally on the disc. In fact, with steamcloud, the disc itself is useless too, since you can just redeem the code on the box and download it yourself... movies do the same thing now and many blu-ray discs include a download coupon so you can watch it on your computer/media server/phone later. As you say, it's more of a convenience issue and it's only now that some publishers are finally realising it.

As for when I decide I like it, again that's completely subjective and also quite unique for each media. You're seeing the world in black and white Eraser and just because I may like one game literally seconds into playing it, another might take a few hours before it finally grips me. If I used your logic, i'd have to stop playing the second game, give it back and never get to the point where I realised it actually was something I wanted to own anyway. Films are completely different and I often only buy a film after watching it in it's entirety a few times, knowing that it is something I want to keep going back to.

Sure, you can argue about entitlement and all that, but the fact remains that the content is out there, easy to access and without risk. Only an idiot wouldn't take advantage of it. Until publishers realise that people don't want to sit through 10 minutes of anti-piracy screens, trailers for shit they don't care about and a million and one other hurdles just before they get to see the thing they paid for, then it's going to be the prefered way. Prove to me that something is worth buying and i'll buy it. Simple as that.

[Eraser]

No, you've completely misunderstoof this. Literally all labels/artists i'm interested know that you need samples before you buy, so they provide them via their website/bandcamp etc.. I rarely have the need to pirate music anymore, simply because it's usually cheap enough anyway and I know exactly what i'm going to be buying, before I actually buy it. The only exception is for out-of-print releases that are impossible to buy anymore on vinyl/cd/tape etc..

I'm not saying samplers (provided by the artist) are a bad thing. I'm just saying that illegally downloading music isn't going to solve the unfair contracts artists have to deal with.

Also, you are an exception to the rule. You have a distinct taste in music and the music you listen to is more than just a cute song on the radio. For you it's a hobby and you're genuinely interested in those artists. The world of your music is composed of people who are in it for the music and getting that music to their fans. They aren't commercial acts put together by some rich man in a suit designed to make loads of money. You're willing to invest in these people because you a thrilled by what they do.

The same isn't true for all the Rhianna and Bruno Mars "fans". They hear a catchy tune on the radio and they would like to have that on their iPod, so they download it. They're completely different ways of consuming music.

Prove to me that something is worth buying and i'll buy it. Simple as that.

That's the tough thing with media.
A car can be taken for a test drive, and you'll know if you like it. If you don't like it, you don't buy it, but you don't get the convenience of owning the car. Neither party loses out here.

A test-drive of a book, movie, album or game is a tricky thing, because you could argue that you need to read the entire book, watch the entire movie or play the entire game before you know if you'll like it. And if then you don't like it, you've already experienced the entire product, which means that if you don't buy it, you did get the full experience the product has to offer, but you didn't pay for it.

I don't feel that people are entitled to experiencing something and decide if it's worth their money afterwards. It's like going to a restaurant, eat all the food and then say that the food was a bit disappointing so you're not going to pay.

I do agree that the industry is largely at fault for not offering any means of getting a good impression of a piece of entertainment, but that doesn't mean it's a justification for us to go and steal it, or pay for it on our own terms which are so wide and skewed that most people actually won't. And that's another thing, there are a lot of people who say they pay for something they downloaded if they like it, but I'm sure that in reality, only a fraction of those people actually do.

[Tsakali]

I'd steal food from a restaurant that had a replicator.

[brisk]

Again, you're comparing cars, food and other completely irrelevant things to entertainment media. I've literally heard every single analogy there is and they're all stupid. You simply cannot compare things like movies and games to food. Even if you do, I can always retort by saying something equally daft like "if a meal is shite in a restaurant and you're not happy with how it tastes, you can complain, return the food and get your money back".

Entertainment media and distribution is unique and any faults/moral grievances are idiosyncratic and can't be compared to anything else, at least not in any meaningful way. I've said it before and i'll keep saying it, the only way to change peoples attitudes towards piracy and downloading is to make the customer want to buy the product and not give them a shitter product because they actually choose to purchase it. The more game-breaking DRM, endless logos/trailers, buggy, copy-protected, overpriced shite I see, the more I want to download a version that doesn't have it. I also expect to be able to see/play/hear the same content on whatever medium I choose to use it on, be it my tv, computer, phone etc.. Like I say, publishers/studios do seem to finally be catching wind of this and are slowly changing their ways, but it's a case of too little/too late for the most part. They're playing catchup with a system that was developed by people who didn't want the crap and wanted their stuff to work first time, as efficiently as possible, years earlier.

[Eraser]

I don't see why the analogies are wrong. But whatever. Anyway, you're making a case against the faults of publishers and studios and you're right in that. But whatever they do, it is never an excuse for illegal downloading. It doesn't make it OK, and it certainly doesn't make it legal.

If you want to fight the wrongs in the industry, downloading their products is just not the smartest move to make. It's a pretty dumb one, actually, because it proves the studios right.

[brisk]

I'm also on both sides of the fence, since I know that my own music gets pirated to hell and back. You can either cry about, blaming all consumers as evil, immoral little bastards, who don't care, or you can simply offer them something that changes their mind. I spend thousands of pounds pressing my work onto vinyl, trying to make the packaging as good as I can, making them want to own it, rather than trying to convince them to give me money for something that is inherently worse than what they can simply download for free.

I pressed this last year:



Now music aside, it is something far more appealing to most people than a few MP3s, zipped up and downloaded from mediafire. I also gave the digital versions away for free to everyone who bought a copy. I know for a fact that people still downloaded the shit of it illegally, but these people were never going to buy it anyway. Instead, you can only try and convince them to want to get a superior product and give your paying customers something special for choosing to do so. Treating all your customers as criminals automatically is wrong and is no doubt what caused this shitty little situation in the first place. Like I say, convince us that it's worth buying your product and you'll find that a great deal of people will do so.

[Eraser]

Absolutely true.
The stuff like this or this is just beautiful to have.

But that's also what I meant with you (and myself) being the exception to the rule. I am willing to spend some extra money on pretty stuff like this, but Rhianna fans won't because there's no connection between the artist and the fan that runs as deep as your connection with your fans. Ultimately that's the fault of the industry as well, as they treat their artists as disposable products.

[brisk]

Did you know, I actually worked with Steven Wilson of Porcupine Tree on that record above? The CD is actually remixes of his tracks, which he allowed me to give as a bonus disc with the vinyl. He also said that the album (and the previous one I sent him) were in his top albums for 2010 He's a really great guy too.

Anyway, for pop acts, publishers and labels know that the real money comes in playing live/touring anyway. Actual music sales are fuck all compared to this and all that market is monopolised by itunes/spotify anyway. It's also why you see loads of labels uploading official music videos to youtube, since that's how a fuckload of people actually listen to music now. It shows that they're adapting at least.

[Transient]

Books can be read in libraries for free. [snip]

As for when I decide I like it, again that's completely subjective and also quite unique for each media. You're seeing the world in black and white Eraser and just because I may like one game literally seconds into playing it, another might take a few hours before it finally grips me. If I used your logic, i'd have to stop playing the second game, give it back and never get to the point where I realised it actually was something I wanted to own anyway. Films are completely different and I often only buy a film after watching it in it's entirety a few times, knowing that it is something I want to keep going back to.

Books in libraries are paid for, so the author gets paid. Same with Netflix; you don't pay individually for the streaming movies you watch, so in a sense they're "free" for the end user, but the films were paid for by Netflix, so again the creators are getting paid. The same goes for any place you rent shit from.

Speaking of renting stuff, that's a good way to determine if you want to buy something. That, or read reviews and do a little research before you buy. You may decide to buy a game you may not get into until 2 hours in based on reviews out there. I know I've done it. I was on the fence about Skyrim because I wasn't a big fan of Morrowind or Oblivion, but reviews convinced me to give it a shot, so I bought it (and was not disappointed). Risk of dissatisfaction is inherent in any purchase, not just music/movies/TV/games.

Incidentally, what's your website? I want to hear some of your stuff.

[seremtan]

i only get TV shows via the tubes. if they're very good, with replay value, i'll buy the boxed set. in fact, there are plenty of boxed sets on my shelf that i would never have bought at all if i hadn't had the chance to get them from the innertubes first, since i almost never watch TV

as for games, there's no excuse not to buy them legit. there's fuckloads of 'let's play' type footage on youtube to get a pretty good idea of whether or not you'll enjoy them, and it's not like they're ridiculously expensive either

movies: almost all Hollywood movies suck walrus scrotum so there's no excuse there either. the ones that don't are worth getting on blu-ray

[Κracus]

I apparently downloaded 2 movies that I know I've never downloaded or watched so the acuracy on that is questionable..

[Tsakali]

but you have other peeps using the net in your house right? if not, then change your wifi password you noob.

[AmIdYfReAk]

Static IP for 3 years, and this is all they've got.

Dexter S06E06 HDTV XviD-ASAP[ettv] (549.96 MB) Nov, 2011

[AmIdYfReAk]

I apparently downloaded 2 movies that I know I've never downloaded or watched so the acuracy on that is questionable..

Static IP? or Dynamic? and how's your wireless security?

[LawL]

Thread confirms Eraser hasn't had sex in years.

[IveGotPenisEnvy]

Thanks for the IPs.

[Captain]

A test-drive of a book, movie, album or game is a tricky thing, because you could argue that you need to read the entire book, watch the entire movie or play the entire game before you know if you'll like it.

No you don't. Books have a summary on the back, movies have trailers, and most games have demos. If you have great taste—like me—you'll never have buyer's remorse.

[Tsakali]

please

[seremtan]

If you're poor—like me—you'll never have buyer's remorse.

fft

[feedback]

I paid for 2 games this year and I wish I didn't buy either of them. MW3 and BF3. I've always downloaded and played before now, I really regret giving my money to both devs. I played BF3 for about 30 minutes today. Honestly not even a little fun.

[seremtan]

look on the bright side: suckers for shiny crap like yourself are putting the game devs' kids through college. you're contributing to a better future for us all