“Truth? You can't handle the truth!”

[Emperor]

Yeah, I literally refuse to engage with this one.  I don't think I could get up in the morning if I did - my first thought was 'well that's that then'. And that's without even thinking about the comments at that link.

All I had going through my head was this:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTifdoKXoxM

[JOE SOAP]

All I had going through my head was this:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTifdoKXoxM

at least you have Alien3 to look forward to...

[JOE SOAP]

Conspiracy Kids! It's Christmas -or whatever pagan holiday you celebrate:









http://truthertoys.com/toys.html

[Emperor]

Good move, you've just ruined hsarky's Xmas - how is he supposed to look surprised now when opening his presents? How??

[Roger Godpleton]

Why are they all so obsessed with sodomy?

[TordelBack]

Ah don't knock it etc.

[Hoagy]

2 times is a charm??

Once bitten twice shy??

Someone's not listening to old proverbs.


http://kotaku.com/5874706/report-mass-suicide-threats-at-xbox-360-plant

[SpetsnaZ99]

2 times is a charm??

Once bitten twice shy??

Someone's not listening to old proverbs.


http://kotaku.com/5874706/report-mass-suicide-threats-at-xbox-360-plant

I wouldnt be at all surprised if microsoft made that into a game for the 360

[Emperor]

2 times is a charm??

Once bitten twice shy??

Someone's not listening to old proverbs.


http://kotaku.com/5874706/report-mass-suicide-threats-at-xbox-360-plant

I wouldnt be at all surprised if microsoft made that into a game for the 360

Top (Yourself) Trumps?

[The Legendary Shark]

So, this SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) bill, any thoughts?

It seems to me that this is merely an attempt to introduce censorship through the back door.

Let's take this very forum and hypothesise a bit...

This thread (and others) contain some pretty inflammatory posts which, if true or even partially true, may cast serious doubts upon the honesty and integrity of official governmental and corporate bodies which the Powers that Be don't like. How to erase such posts so that only official and officially approved news and information are accessible? In the case of this board, it's now dead easy to censor it. All they have to do is look for any copyright infringement - maybe a Dredd v Batman pic in the Art Comp thread or a Dante Does She-Hulk tale in the Short Story comp or a copyrighted unicorn paining in That Thread. Any of these items are now "legitimate targets" for lawyers to attack and close down or block 2000ADonline and impose hefty fines on the website's owners. Sly, isn't it? Your own personal website could be shut down for the same reason if you, say, posted a video of your wedding and there happens to be a copyrighted song playing in the background or you post a photo of yourself on holiday at Disneyland where there happens to be someone in a Mickey Mouse suit in the bakground.

One of the spurious claims made in support of SOPA is that pirating movies is costing Hollywood a fortune in revenues, but this is almost certainly not the case. Very few Hollywood movies make a profit in themselves through theatrical releases, most of their profits come from back-end sales (DVDs, CD soundtracks, TV revenues, merchandising etc.). Hollywood Accounting Demystified.

Also, who are the so-called criminals making money out of illegal downloads? In my experience, the people who rip and post CDs and DVDs and software on torrent sites do so without charge. Indeed, most posters actually purchase the DVD/Software/CD out of their own pocket and then rip and post movies/songs/software for free as per the altruistic spirit of the internet. When was the last time anybody paid for an illegal download? If a Harry Potter movie rip is downloaded 10,000 times the movie companies make the outrageous claim that they've just lost 10,000 DVD sales which is blatantly untrue.

I've also read reports that people who download movies and songs, on the whole, wouldn't buy the things they download if they weren't available as torrent files and that many of those who do download illegally are also the most likely to purchase music legally as well, as these reports on music piracy claim:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/4718249.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009...buy-more-music
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...l-1812776.html

There is also the argument that copyright infringement hampers creativity - but this is another blatant lie. SOPA discourages things like this and this and even this silly thing.

This whole idea approaches the piracy "problem" from completely the wrong angle - from an accountancy angle. What the entertainment companies should do is turn the "problem" over to creative people and not bean counters. Ideas off the top of my head include posting free to download DVD rips to sites like Pirate Bay but include a couple of ad-breaks in the movie just like you get on TV, or post edited versions with discount codes so that genuine DVDs can be ordered at discount, or include a number of free DVD rip downloads with every cake of blank DVDs purchased - DIY DVDs would save the companies millions in manufacturing costs! I'm sure there are far cleverer people who could come up with far better ideas. Even charging $1 for a DVD rip would generate some income for the companies involved and cost very little to set up. I'm sure the folks on this very forum could come up with even better ideas than mine.

So, with all these possibilities available, why does the entertainment industry want to go down the route of fining a Minnesota woman $222,000 for illegally downloading 24 songs? (Or did I just answer my own question there?) Michael Mozart may have the answer...

Anyhoo, what do you think? SOPA good or SOPA bad?

[TordelBack]

SOPA bad.  Those of a piratical bent will quickly and easily cirucumvent any provisions (e.g. http://lifehacker.com/5869665/desopa-for-firefox-bypasses-sopa-dns-blocking), while legitimate sites will be subject to spurious and largely undefendable attack from corporate opportunists, with the added concern (as Sharky points out) of this potentially being used to censor unwanted opinions. 

As long as two computers can still connect to each other over distance, this type of broad-measure bill will only have negative effects on the resource that is the Web.

[Roger Godpleton]

All I know is that I can't edit my Numb3rs episode summaries until tomorrow. WHEN I'M AT WORK.

[Emperor]

Write them out in Notepad and upload them later.

One of the spurious claims made in support of SOPA is that pirating movies is costing Hollywood a fortune in revenues, but this is almost certainly not the case. Very few Hollywood movies make a profit in themselves through theatrical releases, most of their profits come from back-end sales (DVDs, CD soundtracks, TV revenues, merchandising etc.). Hollywood Accounting Demystified.

I think you missed the point of that piece, films often make tonnes of money, for the distributor who is often owned by the parent of the production company. It is the production company that usually operates at a loss because they sold them film to the distributors (i.e. themselves) for more than they'd ever recoup:

Here's a basic example of Hollywood Accounting: A studio makes a movie. The studio distributes the movie itself, and although the distributor is technically a separate company, they both belong to the same parent company. Also, the distribution arm sets whatever fees it wants. If they want to charge themselves eleventy quintillion dollars for distribution, they totally can. Then, even if the film earns billions of dollars in box office receipts, they're still technically in debt (to themselves) and thus haven't turned a profit.

Sound ridiculous? It happens all the freaking time. David Prowse, the guy who was in the Darth Vader costume in the original trilogy of Star Wars (before being ousted by that douche Hayden Christensen in the special edition) has never been paid for Return of the Jedi because it hasn't turned a profit after nearly 30 years. That's after dozens of home video and theatrical re-releases. (All the merchandising money goes to Lucas directly, of course.)

Similarly, someone leaked Warner Bros.' accounting sheet for Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix onto the internet, showing that the film that had grossed about $1 billion worldwide had lost $167 million on paper.

Winston Groom, the writer of Forrest Gump was told that the film based on his work wasn't profitable. Of course, he got the last laugh when they came to him asking if they could turn the sequel, Gump and Co. into a film as well, and he reportedly told them, "I cannot, in good conscience, allow money to be wasted on a failure." In other words, "Go fuck yourself."

www.filmschoolrejects.com/features/6-things-the-film-industry-doesnt-want-you-to-know-about.php/all/1

Its why you need a sharp lawyer to get you a cut off the gross profits not the net.

Dodgy accounting practices don't, however, have much bearing on downloading, although it is difficult to muster up much sympathy if they are using these practices to screw the writers and actors out of money.

If a Harry Potter movie rip is downloaded 10,000 times the movie companies make the outrageous claim that they've just lost 10,000 DVD sales which is blatantly untrue.

However, I have heard of small publishers of rare, foreign DVDs not releasing some films because the core audience all pretty much have copies they've downloaded long ago. Now it might be that the core audience are also the ones happy to shell out for a good quality DVD with plenty of extras but they just aren't prepared to take the risk in some cases.

Of course, it could be argued that, like fansubbed manga, being able to get hold of a dirty (sometimes unsubbed) copy of a rare foreign film actually helps expand the market and creates a larger audience, but it is difficult to quantify.

Anyhoo, what do you think? SOPA good or SOPA bad?

Bad, of course.

[The Legendary Shark]

I think you missed the point of that piece, films often make tonnes of money, for the distributor who is often owned by the parent of the production company. It is the production company that usually operates at a loss because they sold the film to the distributors (i.e. themselves) for more than they'd ever recoup:

Thanks, Emps - I had indeed missed that point. Now that I've read the extract you've posted you can probably hear my teeth grinding even from over there in your rubber room*.

Banks do similar things with loans and who foots the bill? Look in the mirror. Ooh, they make me so mad...

*where you keep your collection of condoms.

[COMMANDO FORCES]

So if 2000 AD goes completely online and people start to download it from an illegal free place on the web, forcing it out of business, then that's okay 

People may say they would buy it from Rebellion but I bet the figures would decline, especially after the end of the first years subscription runs out.

Before the loons attack, I'm just pointing this out even though it won't affect me as I'm paper all the way