Sign Up | Log In
GENERAL DISCUSSIONS
Firefly Sets Yet Another Record!
Saturday, January 27, 2007 8:00 PM
GIGGLYORONINOMICON
Saturday, January 27, 2007 8:30 PM
RAZZA
Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: Anyways, Razza. Nice cynical way to respond and twist my statements. Can't attack my argument, so just attack me. Quite the childish approach. That's Fine. Perhaps we will just have to agree to disagree on the subject. But you were semi right. If you (hypothetically anyone, not necessarily YOU) agree with stealing material, then no i don't consider you a fan of that material, just someone jumping on a bandwagon who is too cheap to invest in the bandwagon. Sorry if that offends you or anyone else here, but....how did you put it? .....If the shoe fits.
Saturday, January 27, 2007 9:48 PM
PONGLUVER
Quote:Originally posted by Razza: Are you being deliberately this dense? If you had read my earlier posts you would know that I have supported Joss' work with my hard earned cash. I own two sets of the Firefly DVD's, a Serenity DVD, as well as several Seasons of both Angel and Buffy. I have also downloaded the entire Firefly series before 1I ever purchased the DVD's. Does that mean I'm thief? By your definition apparently so. I think it's ironic that you love Firefly whose main character is a proudly self professed thief, but cannot envision the possibility that there are shades of thievery that do not fall into the black and white lens you seem to see the world through.
Quote:I'm glad you are such a fervent fan of Joss' work, misguided though you might be. Joss isn't running around like a chicken with his head cutoff decrying the evils of peer-to-peer file sharing. He is a true artist motivated by more than financial gain. I say that with full confidence because I know that such creative talent could not possibly exist in an individual consumed by financial reward. He writes and creates because he hopes to enrich the lives of those his creation touches, and I love him for it! He has succeeded immensely as far as I'm concerned, for me personally and everyone who visits this website and others like it devoted to his artistic creations. I say we do whatever we can to disseminate his creation as widely as possible and enrich the lives of as many people as we can with Joss' work, and in so doing feed the creative soul we all love. That is the measure of true success, not the size of one's wallet! Any true fan should know that.
Sunday, January 28, 2007 9:06 AM
Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: I did read your earlier posts, I believe i wrote "not necessarily you". It isn't about you. Nobody is going to download a 20 gig file to BUY it later. Thats a ridiculous notion. Thats my point. This isn't about spreading the word. It's about doing something that will ultimately hurt Joss's sales and future ambitions. Quit trying to make this into a personal thing. I said supporting piracy of his work. But you obviously have not intention of commenting on what i post, rather just a twisted, vague interpretation of possible meanings in it. And this delusional view of a poetic justice in stealing work about a thief, does in no way justifies anything. It just further proves the childish nature of your argument.
Quote:Just because Joss doesn't complain about piracy of his work, doesn't mean he supports it. Or that as a fan it is all right. And if you don't believe Joss doesn't want to make money, that's just naive. Sure, he isn't purely motivated by greed, but he is a PROFESSIONAL. If it is misguided to actually care that Joss's work makes a finacial gain, than you are right.
Quote:Like i said, we must agree to disagree. You are providing no arguments, just juvenile, anarchist centered ramblings and personal attacks. You can disseminate (good word usage, btw) his work legally where he wouldn't take a loss, as i have shown examples of. However it seems your motivation isn't in spreading his work, rather just participation in a poetic rebellious act to try and somehow relate to the very material you support stealing. It doesn't seem we are going to ever join hands in this argument, and it seems to become more personal by the post. So unless you have something ideological to post concerning the topic, i would say we have reached a stalemate. This discussion is heading nowhere. I see no point in continuing it unless you bring something to the table worth discussing.
Quote:I don't care if someone who has never been exposed to joss downloads his stuff. But we aren't talking about Joe Schmo downloading a 700mb .avi in Cleveland because his friend told him about a movie he HAD to see. Someone who has never seen Serenity is not downloading a 20 gig file. You don't waste 20 gigs on a movie you know dick about. This is for people who have seen and like the movie...[
Quote:Originally posted by Signamuki: ...There is also the fact that the more people in the swarm that are uploading/downloading, the faster people get the files. Bittorrent is very scalable. There's also the little fact that one can start a torrent and walk away. All that needs to happen is for the computer to remain on and connected to the internet. So, what does it matter if it takes 10 minutes or a couple weeks or more?
Sunday, January 28, 2007 9:44 AM
KANEMAN
Sunday, January 28, 2007 9:49 AM
Sunday, January 28, 2007 10:28 AM
Sunday, January 28, 2007 10:48 AM
Quote:Given those facts, the study says, movie piracy causes a total lost output for U.S. industries of $20.5 billion per year, thwarts the creation of about 140,000 jobs and accounts for more than $800 million in lost tax revenue.
Sunday, January 28, 2007 10:59 AM
Sunday, January 28, 2007 11:06 AM
Sunday, January 28, 2007 11:09 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Razza: Pong: Finally! Some facts I can look at! I'll do that and get back to you this week some time. BTW, Kaneman's assertions support my premise IMHO. He stated that he would never have bought the movies in the first place. How is that a loss to the movie industry? He never would have spent his money on their product in the first place. Thus, they never lost any money from his downloading activities, except for the 25% he says he might have rented. I suspect the studies you cite use the same fuzzy logic. Namely that the industry lost sales they never would have made in the first place. I'll look them over and get back to you when I can. Thanks for posting them!
Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:10 PM
CITIZEN
Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: This article from the BBC shows JUST the UK video industry took a loss of 45 million pounds in 2003 alone. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/3692999.stm
Quote:The BVA also reported a 61% increase in DVD sales in 2003 ... Total sales across the video industry rose from £2.05bn in 2002 to £2.42bn last year.
Quote:Wanna go back to music? This shows the 11% drop in sales from the music industry. Read the article and you find that as a 1.6 billion dollar loss, IN JUST THE FIRST HALF of 2002. http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=2554
Quote:the record industry cut their inventory (and artist investment) by 25 percent and sales only dropped 4.1 percent, even though the economy is at rock bottom.
Quote:Your childish notions have been squashed. You continue to show nothing worth discussion. Don't argue facts unless you actually research for it.
Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:13 PM
YINYANG
You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.
Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: Wanna go back to music? This shows the 11% drop in sales from the music industry. Read the article and you find that as a 1.6 billion dollar loss, IN JUST THE FIRST HALF of 2002. http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=2554
Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:38 PM
Quote:Hmm, funny because for the same period I remember seeing the music industries profits go up, being at the time quite interested in the reality of the situation with Napster and the like as I was completing a degree in Computer Science. Interestingly I found this:
Quote:Sales rose by £370 Million, funny I can't seem to find that £45Million loss anywhere in that.
Quote:Also is this how one takes the moral high ground? Implying your opponent is childish, hasn't got anything to say worth listening to? You've been protesting heavily that your opponents are attacking you, your protestations would hold more weight if you held your temper.
Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:45 PM
Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: NO, the first half ends in June. 9/11 had nothing to do with it.
Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:49 PM
Quote:Originally posted by yinyang: Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: NO, the first half ends in June. 9/11 had nothing to do with it. Of course not - pirating can be the only reason why for the first half of 2002, profits were down. I didn't say that, you asked about 9-11. And the answer was NO. We don't know 100% for sure what altered profits. Hense my "no hard proof on either side" stuff above. We only know 9-11 wasn't to blame. First half ended MONTHS before the attacks. Sorry.
Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: NO, the first half ends in June. 9/11 had nothing to do with it. Of course not - pirating can be the only reason why for the first half of 2002, profits were down.
Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:54 PM
Sunday, January 28, 2007 1:08 PM
Sunday, January 28, 2007 1:09 PM
Quote:Originally posted by yinyang: 9/11 was in 2001. The profits went down in 2002.
Sunday, January 28, 2007 1:15 PM
Sunday, January 28, 2007 1:38 PM
Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: You "remember" seeing profits go up? Ok, because YOU remember differently, the Ivy League report must be wrong.
Quote:Yeah, and the worldwide spree of arrests and crackdowns for internet piracy in 2003/2004 couldn't possibly be to blame for the rise.
Quote:You are right about the propaganda however. It is thick on both sides of this argument. Neither side is free of it. Every report from both side seem to carry a degree of bias. Which is why i didn't post to begin with. Fact is, there is no resolution. This debate is like the War On Terror or The War On Drugs. Its an argument that has no right answer. No Finality.
Quote:I held my temper. I said nothing out of line. Nor did i claim to TAKE the moral high ground. Also, i am not considering him my opponent.
Quote:However you are right, this debate has turned way to personal on both sides. This is unfortunate and unwarranted.
Quote:I still don't feel a 20 gig file is for recreational viewing and promotion. The average computer HD for people that i know is 60-80 gigs. The average person wont use 1/4-1/3 of their HD space for a movie they might hate. Which begs my question, What is this really for?
Quote:So please. Explain it to me. How does it help?
Sunday, January 28, 2007 2:08 PM
Quote:Because there is a great deal of data that indicates that peer to peer downloads actually increase, rather than decrease, sales on the whole. This is part of the discussion you've been having with Razza.
Quote:But they would pay £15? I think that's something to think about.
Quote:Really, you're tone sounded rather aggressive, would it be in-line for me to dismiss anything you had to say as 'childish'? Whether you consider Razz your opponent or not is irrelevant, you are on opposite sides of an argument, that makes him your opponent. That is the only context within which I meant.
Quote:You like pirating, except with works you support? So, doesn't that make all pirating wrong? Somebody out there likes something that everybody's pirating; but, as long as it's not works you like, it's not your problem? That seems to be the feeling I'm getting.
Sunday, January 28, 2007 2:31 PM
Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: I'm not asking about P2P, i'm specifically asking about THIS HD-DVD rip. Everyone keeps trying to vague it up. ... We aren't referring to P2P as a whole. It is this particular rip.
Quote:And this data you speak of has the same fractured points of fact as you pointed out in my data.
Quote:If not given the choice to steal it, i believe so, yes. That's nothing in terms of price.
Quote:In that regard i didn't view him as an opponent. We aren't really ON different sides. I believe we both feel our side is in the best interest of the verse.
Quote:Yet, on the other side of the argument there is no give, its absolute.
Quote:You are all acting as if i am close minded, yet wont even entertain the possibility piracy might hurt dvd sales. And if that was someday proven, would you still support the piracy of his work?
Sunday, January 28, 2007 3:02 PM
Quote:I'm sorry but £15 is rather more than I'm willing to spend on something I might not want.
Quote:This is a discussion, it is your job to produce a compelling argument, not to chastise us for not finding your argument compelling. I also think that any inference of 'acting like you are close minded' is coming entirely from you.
Sunday, January 28, 2007 3:12 PM
Sunday, January 28, 2007 3:20 PM
Quote:Originally posted by kaneman: "It occurs to me you don't really want to discuss the issue, you just want to argue with someone." What took you so long to figure that out Pongluver? Pongluver meet Citz........Enjoy, and remember to wash your hands when finished...Citz has a way of making people feel dirty after a "discussion".
Monday, January 29, 2007 7:09 AM
Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: You obviously have no intent to discuss the issue. You are now just trying to incite a harsh comment.
Quote:I'm not here to WIN and argument.
Monday, January 29, 2007 8:27 AM
Monday, January 29, 2007 8:53 AM
Monday, January 29, 2007 8:57 AM
Quote:I hadn't noticed that he has only been a member of the site for 5 days and has only posted in this discussion. I have to agree with your assessment of him, he isn't interested in a discussion, only insulting those who disagree with him. I looked over my posts and his again, and the only one of us who has engaged in personal attacks is him.
Quote:Given your continued personal attacks and baseless accusations of same on any who disagree with you, you're apparent allegiance to a well known troll of these boards, and the fact that you've been here for only 5 days and have, in that time, apparently only interacted in this thread I am forced to conclude that you are indeed not here to WIN an argument, you are here to TROLL it. I will not respond to you further, and urge other posters: Please don't feed the trolls.
Monday, January 29, 2007 9:01 AM
Monday, January 29, 2007 11:42 AM
Quote:Originally posted by citizen: I will not reply again, because all you are doing is proving me right.
Quote:none of your baseless accusations are worth refuting
Quote:in fact the only people who bought data to this discussion were myself, Razza and Sigma, you're inabillity to recognise that which you do not want to see is entirely your own problem
Monday, January 29, 2007 1:43 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Razza: I looked over my posts and his again, and the only one of us who has engaged in personal attacks is him.
Monday, January 29, 2007 8:09 PM
Quote:spelling corrections (some of which are wrong)
Quote:you're inabillity to recognise that which....
Quote:Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) in·a·bil·i·ty /ˌɪnəˈbɪlɪti/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-uh-bil-i-tee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun lack of ability; lack of power, capacity, or means: his inability to make decisions.
Quote:rec·og·nize /ˈrɛkəgˌnaɪz/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[rek-uhg-nahyz] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –verb (used with object), -nized, -niz·ing. 1. to identify as something or someone previously seen, known, etc.: He had changed so much that one could scarcely recognize him. 2. to identify from knowledge of appearance or characteristics: I recognized him from the description. They recognized him as a fraud. 3. to perceive as existing or true; realize: to be the first to recognize a fact.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007 5:50 PM
OHSM333
Quote:Originally posted by 6ixStringJack: Whatever man... I was waiting for the haters to come out. If anything this will bring more people to us and they'll see that maybe there's still a chance to buy the show to see more. That's what happened to me. I did the same thing with Arrested Development. I had already downloaded the first two seasons of that show, but when I found out FUX was going to cancell it, I dropped $60.00 on their website that I didn't need to drop on the DVDs. Sure, not everyone who downloads it is going to buy it, but it's still a higher percentage of people who would have had they'd never seen it at all. It's rather like cold calling in that regards, although this is free advertizing and it's a product that people will want. This technology is here to stay. Hackers will always find workarounds. Don't be an Alliance-bot. I'm not getting into another argument about the virtues of Piracy and just how wrong your train of thought is and how Alliance-like you sound when you say such things as I've been over this all before. I think it's a beautiful thing that the only "real-life" pirates left in this world chose Serenity to be their flagship "F YOU!" to DRM, HDDVD, BlueRay and the MPAA in this, the next round of entertainment butchering. Can't stop the signal bro. Just for you, here's a little bump on the thread. CMOTD - There has never been any evidence that the ability to download movies or music online has reduced the number of DVDs or CDs of quality goods in the stores. (read: QUALITY goods) If the CD's only have one good song on them, that's a different story altogether and those Artists are getting screwed by legal downloading vendors such as ITunes just as much as illegal sites. Who is going to drop $16.00 on a CD when they can pay $0.99 for a song. Anything the RIAA or MPAA has said about piracy has nothing to do with them looking out for the interests of the artists. This is just a ploy to guilt people into buying 14 crap songs to get the one good one you were looking for to help their bottom line. They figured out that it wasn't working so they turned on their own artists they supposedly cared so much about and started selling their songs for a buck a piece. Piracy gives you a choice to support what you really like. Piracy of CDs and DVDs is like giving people a vote as to what they like and support. If they really are a fan of Firefly/Serenity, they will buy a copy of the show/movie. If not, then I don't want them spending money on something they think is crap after they have plunked down the money and watched it. Wouldn't that just be fodder for negative feedback of this great show? Don't kid yourself... though we love this show, there will always be haters. "A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack
Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:20 AM
TENTHCREWMEMBER
Could you please just make it stranger? Stranger. Odder. Could be weirder. More bizarre. How about uncanny?
Quote: To get back on subject. Nobody answered my question. How pirating a 20 gig movie file would help the DVD sales. Considering most sane people wont risk a virus on their HD from a film they might hate, while taking up 25% of their HD space.
Saturday, February 17, 2007 1:51 PM
ZAB0TAGE
Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:52 PM
Quote:Originally posted by TenthCrewMember: Quote: To get back on subject. Nobody answered my question. How pirating a 20 gig movie file would help the DVD sales. Considering most sane people wont risk a virus on their HD from a film they might hate, while taking up 25% of their HD space. For the same reason cassette tapes and copying music back then INCREASED sales tenfold, despite the industry's claims to the opposite. The more people are able to share their interests with others, the more likely the others will buy said interest for a) sense of ownership of something WORTH owning and b) to support the QUALITY product in the hopes of being able to own MORE of it in the future. Cassettes and "mix tapes" did not kill the music industry, even though their execs wanted us to believe that, and DVD rips will NOT kill DVD sales. They will only increase the sales as MORE people become exposed to something they didn't know before. Ai ya, it is the best advertising you can do. It's like word-of-mouth with tangibility! And if you (whoever you may be reading this) don't believe that, then you are ignoring history, which has proven to repeat itself, and frankly, that leaves you in a class with small-minded FOX executives...no wait, even THEY saw the value of illegal copies of their canceled show being sold, and thus released the DVD box set of Firefly, and made a small mint. So I guess you'll be left alone on some piece of crap moon with your idealistic fantasies about sharing information and putting things in public domain... "If ignorance is bliss, then you're the happiest person in the universe."
Sunday, February 18, 2007 9:11 AM
Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: only problem with that comparison is that we are talking about completely different quality of formats. Mix Tape Cassettes and Digital Music are not near the same quality. When contemplating stealing something you are no going to settle for crap which what Cassette Rips were, hence people bought the music anyways. However with the high quality of music/movie rips in the digital age as compared to the analog age you are referring to, will please someone FAR more. Nice try at being witty though with your long winded closing remarks. btw, i thought this thread was dead, whats with the sudden interest in reviving it without adding anything new?
Sunday, February 18, 2007 2:51 PM
Quote:Originally posted by TenthCrewMember: And it's folk like you who just don't get it. I'm not talking about TECHNICAL quality here, I'm talking about ARTISTIC quality. If it is good enough for like minded folk, they will go and buy it. It is really that simple. AS FOR the "dead" and "reviving", well it was posted on the home page here, and there was a question was left unanswered. I tried to put into perspective that could be understood, since it wasn't clearly explained to at least one individual. If you don't like the thread, don't read it, and certainly don't comment on it, otherwise you'll be reading more statements you don't like. I seriously doubt that Homer (and NOT Simpson...) was upset that other folks were sharing the Odyssey and the Illiad. Nor would William Shakespeare have tried to sue a school for studying Romeo & Juliet with a copy of the script. But it's all about the gold, that almighty dollar, the cashy money, isn't it? It isn't about quality of life, and sharing something special with friends, is it? Try opening your mind and look at the bigger picture. And for the record, I own NO illegally downloaded movies or music (just sayin' for them that need told). Doesn't mean I think it is right or wrong for anybody else to do the same. I was simply showing you something you clearly fail to still see. Not everything in the 'verse is black or white. Sometimes it is simply high-middle excitement... ;)
Sunday, February 18, 2007 4:12 PM
Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: You are not talking about technical quality, but that is a very important factor you are ignoring. Just left to art form, then yeah, none of that is likely to hurt sales of any kind. However the majority of the population/pirates give a crap about art. The technical quality is what makes them, THE MAJORITY, more likely NOT to buy the pirated material.
Quote:Not everything is black and white no, but stealing IS stealing.
Quote:You never answered the question either. You just pulled a Citizen. Some rough arguments about the music industry 20 years ago and danced around the real question with some ideological, 15 year old, angst ridden crap.
Quote:THE QUESTION: How pirating a 20 gig movie file would help the dvd sales? Your rant about cassette mix tapes does not come close to answering that. The few things you mentioned that actually pertained to the discussion have been argued already. So thats why i asked why it was revived without adding ANYTHING NEW. Try to read everything buddy. Let's not waste the adults time unless you actually have something to add.
Sunday, February 18, 2007 4:36 PM
Sunday, February 18, 2007 4:50 PM
Quote:Originally posted by pongluver: sorry, dosed off a couple times reading that. Reproducing copyright material is stealing, even if you don't make a profit. No mater what philosophical reason you do it. That's why it is illegal. Also, how many times can you say the verse? You kids are not in firefly. Stop pretending to be. What i am typing is public domain, its not protected by copyrights. So feel free to post it wherever you want. Its not just art. Its copyright property of Joss Whedon, Mutant Enemy, and 20th Century Fox / Universal. They are legal assets. I see you arguing about cassette mixes, VHS rips, how a murderous society gave me the rights too answer your comments. You are just reaching now. Being a fan, does not entitle you to choose WHAT you pay for of that person, just because you are too cheap. When you don't pay, you are stealing. Plain and Simple. Even if you convince 400 people to buy that DVD it is still... stealing. What REAL fan would support the theft of the very "art" they are fans of. None. Take that any way you want. At least citizen addressed the argument while he blatantly wanted to just argue. You are still dodging everything. You add less to the convo each time you post. Get some sleep, don't miss school in the morning, and try again when you hit puberty.
Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:06 PM
Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:11 PM
GHOULFISH
Sunday, February 18, 2007 6:34 PM
Quote:While we have an open policy concerning messages, please be civil when responding to others.
Sunday, February 18, 2007 9:11 PM
Quote:Originally posted by yinyang: Pongluver: So, if I HATED Firefly, you wouldn't mind if I pirated it? Or, because I do have lackluster feelings for Buffy and Angel, it's okay with you if download them all for free and share them (not for profit)? How does that fit in with "stealing is stealing," unless not all stealing is bad?
Quote:You watching the show in its original airing doesn't make you a fan, just like you liking other Joss works doesn't make you a fan. At least, it doesn't make you any more of a fan than myself or TCM. If a person like/loves the show, then they're a fan, and nobody can say for sure whether another person is or isn't a fan - it's subjective, based on how that individual feels and behaves.
Quote: And, you telling him to "enjoy math class in the morning" doesn't help your case at all.
Quote: P.S. (everyone) Quote:While we have an open policy concerning messages, please be civil when responding to others. And don't bitch at me about being a goody-two shoes or anything - that's just what it says.
Quote:TCM's first comment to me: "If ignorance is bliss, then you're the happiest person in the universe."
Quote:Originally posted by zab0tage: At the end of the day arguing about weather it helps or hinders Joss, Universal or Fox, or any other contributer is pointless, for me, it comes down having morals. If you do happen to download the show and enjoy it, get off your coke drinking, fast food eating ass and buy it. Nothing anyone says or moans about on these boards is gonna make a yellow snows worth of difference to either the Bit-Torrent sites or the powers that be behind the tv/movie making business.
Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:56 AM
WINDSTRUCK
Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:39 AM
Thursday, February 22, 2007 3:50 AM
EBANY
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL