Firefly Sets Yet Another Record! by 6ixStringJack

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.

Pong:

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 appearantly 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.

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.

-----------------
"There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library, this republic of letters, where neither rank, office, nor wealth receives the slightest consideration."
---Andrew Carnegie

"Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly."
---Roger Ebert

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 27, 2007 9:48 PM

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.

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:
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.

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.

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.

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. This is for people who are not going to buy the HD-DVD. Maybe some of them will, sure. But most wont. If this isn't available, maybe some of them WOULD. We will never know now. AND THAT IS MY PROBLEM. If you don't see it, or care about it. Fine. But don't pretend a 20 gig HD-DVD rip is gonna be for a casual promotional download. While i have a problem with it, i never actually knocked the regular downloads. I prefer people don't, but like Loc said "sometimes more people can be brought in" a point i have already supported. This is not a rip intended for that purpose. You know that. So no, i wont support it. I cant support it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

I'll stop making it personal when you do. You were the one who has called me assinine, a second-rate fan, childish, cynical, ararchistic, and twisted just to name a few. I have provided antecdotal evidence, philisophical support, and scientific research to support my position. You have provided nothing but insults and condescension in return. You have not refuted one of my points in the least, yet continue to try and belittle me personally instead of actually addressing the facts I have presented.

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.

Joss' work does make great financial gain and it is my position that peer-to-peer file sharing adds to the gain, where is your evidence to the contrary?

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.

You obviously haven't listened to one word myslef or others on the board have said about the benefits of peer-to-peer file sharing. I have put forth a very concrete philisophical arguement. I will restate it again since you have appearantly failed to see what is right in front of you. Peer-to-peer file sharing is beneficial to the economic well being of the entertainment industry! Read the posts on the board for references to research studies and antecdotal evidence to support this arguement.

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...[

It was Sigmanuki who addressed this in a previous post when he stated:

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?

It is just as effortless to download 20GB as it is 700MB, so why exactly is someone who "doesn't know dick about" the movie never going to do so?

Your statement "...This is for people who are not going to buy the HD-DVD. Maybe some of them will, sure. But most wont. If this isn't available, maybe some of them WOULD." is very telling about your position. You have based it on nothing but conjecture and personal belief. I have provided scientific research in previous posts which supports my position, scientific research conducted by the entertainment industry I might add, you have provided nothing but personal opinion and a highly unscientific poll. Somehow that makes me childish and you a TRUE fan. I agree we cannot "hold hands" on this because you obviously aren't open to the possibility that your personal opinion is not suported by fact, and until you can do so there is not point in continuing.

-----------------
"There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library, this republic of letters, where neither rank, office, nor wealth receives the slightest consideration."
---Andrew Carnegie

"Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly."
---Roger Ebert

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 9:44 AM

I first watched FF after downloading the season from a torrent file. I did end up buying my own set. I download about 7 movies a week, all my music, and a lot of programs. I never buy the original product. So, I can see how it hurts the industry....I just don't give a shit. I am downloading Apocalypto at this very moment. Getting it at 260kbs. It will take me about 50 minutes to download. I would have never rented or bought this movie.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 9:49 AM

One question Kaneman.

Would you ever buy and watch any of the movies and music you currently download if you were unable to? If so, what percentage?

-----------------
"There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library, this republic of letters, where neither rank, office, nor wealth receives the slightest consideration."
---Andrew Carnegie

"Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly."
---Roger Ebert

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 10:28 AM

Razza,
I wouldn't buy any of the movies. I would probably rent 25% of the movies I download. I never buy music cds. I usually download movies I don't know to much about. I try to not download movies my better half would want to rent on the weekend. So, I mostly download obscure low budget movies or ones that I wouldn't rent...I do tend to download all of the music I listen to. If I use the word I one more time in this post .....Slap.....

Love always kaneman

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 10:48 AM

Razza, you have shown no facts to support your claims. The "facts" you provided refer to the music recording industry SEVEN YEARS AGO and in no way hold any reflection on the current climate of internet piracy or the film industry impact to it. You still turn this personal. I never called you those things, i stated you made comments that were adequately described by such terms. Which was true. Your posts resemble the mindless ramblings of a twelve year old. Baseless unsubstantiated rumor, mixed with poetic, philosophical bullshit. You have stated nothing that substantiates your argument, only personal belief which holds no accord or a shred of legitimacy.

Also, its "just as effortless to download a 20 gig file than a 700mb file"? Thats just retarded.

You want hard facts:

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

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

Here is more, hell i will even give you a quote.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/business/articles/0929biz-pir
acy0929.html

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.

also, listen to kaneman. He has no intention of buying the stuff he downloads. That helps dvd sales....how?

My facts came from the BBC, The Arizona Republic, and Yale University. All legitimate and far more recent and actually APPLY to the discussion. Your childish notions have been squashed. You continue to show nothing worth discussion. Don't argue facts unless you actually research for it.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 10:59 AM

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!

-----------------
"There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library, this republic of letters, where neither rank, office, nor wealth receives the slightest consideration."
---Andrew Carnegie

"Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly."
---Roger Ebert

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 11:06 AM

I'll agree with Razza on this. How can it be a loss if I never would have bought in the first place? After seeing a product I like, I usually spread the word. I am sure I made at least 30 of my friends, family, and co-workers into browncoats. I tell everyone about a good flix when I see one. Some of them must buy or rent these movies when they are at the video store.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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!

I would think you would need some time to try and find a way to discard 3 RENOWNED journalistic sources.

How is that a loss? Because the only way you can tell if he wouldn't have bought them is if they weren't available. You argument is that piracy helps DVD sales. In the case of Kaneman, it proves it doesn't. He takes credit for any sales on behalf of his family and friends. For all we know they saw a commercial or read a review. Does it necessarily hurt the sales? We don't know, cause while he believes he would never have bought them, even he cant be certain unless there was a control environment without the piracy aspect. So it supports nothing for you, and leaves my argument unanswered. Nice try at spinning it though.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:10 PM

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

The assertion of a loss of £45 million seems to be coming simply from the number of people who are downloading, so is not a true figure because those people could very well end up buying those films.

Though there are a few interesting little quotes from that article, perhaps you missed them?

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.

Sales rose by £370 Million, funny I can't seem to find that £45Million loss anywhere in that.

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

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:
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.

http://www.azoz.com/music/features/0008.html

That sounds like they're actually doing pretty good? Don't we call it propaganda when we take facts and give a one sided story to blame a scapegoat and/or assert our own ends? (Note: I'm not saying you're engaging in propaganda, more that the RIAA is).

Quote:
Your childish notions have been squashed. You continue to show nothing worth discussion. Don't argue facts unless you actually research for it.

Well that's exactly what I've done here.

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.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:13 PM

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

Which of course has nothing to do with September 11th, 2001, does it?

Rules: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=22892
Voting: http://www.wunschliste.de/index.pl?vote&r=09

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:38 PM

NO, the first half ends in June. 9/11 had nothing to do with it.

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:

You "remember" seeing profits go up? Ok, because YOU remember differently, the Ivy League report must be wrong.

Quote:
Sales rose by £370 Million, funny I can't seem to find that £45Million loss anywhere in that.

Yeah, and the worldwide spree of arrests and crackdowns for internet piracy in 2003/2004 couldn't possibly be to blame for the rise.

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:
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.

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.

I simply stated to begin with, i am against pirating Joss' work for fear it can, IN ANY WAY bring harm to him in terms of his relationship with Hollywood. If that disenfranchises me than so be it. There are no unquestionable facts to support either argument (primarily due to the non-publication of complete Dvd sales figures).

However you are right, this debate has turned way to personal on both sides. This is unfortunate and unwarranted. We are all fans of the same verse and for me to question another fans loyalty was perhaps wrong. I just feel intensely strong about preserving joss's works now and in the future. I perceive anything that can possibly hinder that as a bad thing. 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? Promotion, or a cheap alternative to actually BUYING the dvd.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:45 PM

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

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.

Rules: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=22892
Voting: http://www.wunschliste.de/index.pl?vote&r=09

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 12:54 PM

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

9/11 was in 2001. The profits went down in 2002.

Rules: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=22892
Voting: http://www.wunschliste.de/index.pl?vote&r=09

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 1:08 PM

Appologies, work in progress.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 1:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by yinyang:
9/11 was in 2001. The profits went down in 2002.

Right you are. I was looking at the 2001 Marketshare Data on Videobusiness.com and got the years confused. So perhaps you are right and it affected it. However, is that what you blame for fluctuations since?

Everyone who has commented seems to sidestep one point. If you are Joss' fans, why would you approve of a pirated file with obviously no purpose of bringing in new Browncoats, rather satisfying old ones? If someone could please show me HOW this actually helps, i'll drink the kool-aid right along with you. However this has just turned into a morality of piracy issue that i feel uncomfortable with because I LIKE PIRACY. I just like the Jossverse more. Here i am stuck defending a side i don't support just in hopes of supporting something we all should be...Joss.

So please. Explain it to me. How does it help?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 1:15 PM

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

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.

And, no, I don't blame the recent fluctuations. It's just that, when people look at profits from 2002, they seem to completely ignore the events of 2001 leading up to it. Or, things like city councils planning their budgeting as usual November 2001, and then being surprised when things didn't go the way they thought. It's an irksome point for me, is all.

Rules: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=22892
Voting: http://www.wunschliste.de/index.pl?vote&r=09

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

Yes I remember, quite clearly, that the profits have increased year after year until at least 2004. This assertion is called an Appeal to Authority and is a logical fallacy. Indeed your Ivy League source says nothing of the sort, and if it did, it would be wrong. And indeed if you notice the figures on the link I provided it certainly does suggest that profits were on an upward, not downward trend.

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.

Got data to back that up? I merely showed that rather than taking a loss the industries profits increased.

Surely if the arrests and crackdowns had allowed for an increase in profits they would have prevented the tripling of pirate downloads and this actually helps to refute the £45m loss figure, no?

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.

I never said both sides didn't, I said the specific assertion was most likely an example of propaganda.

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.

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:
However you are right, this debate has turned way to personal on both sides. This is unfortunate and unwarranted.

I couldn't agree more.

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?

But they would pay £15? I think that's something to think about.

Quote:
So please. Explain it to me. How does it help?

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.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

I'm not asking about P2P, i'm specifically asking about THIS HD-DVD rip. Everyone keeps trying to vague it up. And this data you speak of has the same fractured points of fact as you pointed out in my data. We aren't referring to P2P as a whole. It is this particular rip.

Quote:
But they would pay £15? I think that's something to think about.

If not given the choice to steal it, i believe so, yes. That's nothing in terms of price.

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.

I only meant my tone was harsher than intended. 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.
However i was accused of putting things in Black and White, yet several times i have compromised in the argument and conceded points, first with the possibility that piracy brings in new fans, AND can marginally increase sales POTENTIALLY. Yet, on the other side of the argument there is no give, its absolute. 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?

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.

Actually, yes. Although you are twisting it a bit. I don't like stealing the work of someone i like with no intent to enrich the fan base. I have said i dislike it personally but can deal with normal copies of FF etc.. on the torrent sites etc...

However i am against the pirating of something that has no intention of doing that. Frankly, its irritating having to write the same thing over and over.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

What on Earth are you talking about? Yes we are talking about P2P, that's the delivery system FOR THIS RIP. If P2P can be shown to increase sales on the whole then it is reasonable to assert that it is likely to do the same for Serenity. It almost seems like you just want to remove any data that doesn't support your hypothesis, because whatever the specific case the overall P2P issue is at the very heart of it.

Quote:
And this data you speak of has the same fractured points of fact as you pointed out in my data.

Did you read it? I'm talking specifically of the figures, numbers, that clearly show that the industries income dropped by less than its outlay, ergo profits increased, profits being what you make over and above what you spend.

What, specifically, is 'fractured' about that?

Quote:
If not given the choice to steal it, i believe so, yes. That's nothing in terms of price.

People aren't willing to use up a seizable portion of their HDD which they can get back as and when they decide they like it and buy it or decide they don't like it and delete it, but are ready to spend money they can't get back if they find they don't like it? I'm sorry but £15 is rather more than I'm willing to spend on something I might not want.

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.

That doesn't mean you are not opponents on opposite sides of an argument. Socialists and Capitalists think they're systems are in the best interests of the state, doesn't mean they're not rivals.

Quote:
Yet, on the other side of the argument there is no give, its absolute.

So?

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?

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.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 3:02 PM

You obviously have no intent to discuss the issue. You are now just trying to incite a harsh comment.

You say did i read the figures? Yes. However they would be incomplete since complete sales figures for dvd's ARE NOT RELEASED. So its just bias estimates. Three times now i have tried to turn the discussion positive. You continue to sidestep my simple questions.

Quote:
I'm sorry but £15 is rather more than I'm willing to spend on something I might not want.

In America, thats nothing. People buy dvd's for that all the time. It is most common. And lets face it, in terms of dvd sales, America is far more important due to our gluttony. You can easily buy the dvd and re-gift it if you hate it, rather than risk a virus downloading an unknown file.

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.

completely ignoring half of what people are typing and irking out conclusions on vague interpretations is not a discussion.

It occurs to me you don't really want to discuss the issue, you just want to argue with someone.

I'm not here to WIN and argument. I am here to understand why its necessary and how its good to pirate the HD-DVD copy. You state, that it helps dvd sales. There are no solid facts to support that. True, there are none to the contrary. I understand that you believe it does. But there is no proof. If you a fan, what do you gain in risking it? You save 13 bucks.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 28, 2007 3:12 PM

"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".

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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".

hehehe

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

Please, I have been as polite as possible to you. As in fact has Razza, I detected none of the accusations you made against him, though I did see many comments from you calling Razza 'childish', 'stupid' and 'not a true fan'. These seem not just rather childish, but also rather trollish, I chose to give you the benefit of the doubt, but given the fact that you and one of the well known trolls of this board have just simply chosen to attack me personally I can only assume that my decision was an error.

In fact given your continued baseless accusations and protestations the only conclusion that can be drawn is that you are indeed completely uninterested in any discussion whatsoever.

Quote:
I'm not here to WIN and argument.

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.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 29, 2007 8:27 AM

Thanks Citizen!

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.

-----------------
"There is not such a cradle of democracy upon the earth as the Free Public Library, this republic of letters, where neither rank, office, nor wealth receives the slightest consideration."
---Andrew Carnegie

"Doing research on the Web is like using a library assembled piecemeal by pack rats and vandalized nightly."
---Roger Ebert

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 29, 2007 8:53 AM

It quickly gets old when the only person whose actually being personal and insulting is screaming about percieved slights.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

OK, so calling me dense, misguided, and saying i can only see things in black and white isn't personal attacks? Ok.

Anything i "called" you referred to a particular comment, i always addressed particular comments as childish, etc... YOU decided to address ME.

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.

Just because this is the only topic i have posted in, that means i do not want to discuss it? Sure, i have no need to spam other threads when i have nothing to say in it. What kind of reasoning is that? It's just as bias and unfounded as your "research" to support your argument. I don't know what allegiance you speak of, but its nice how you are so quick to point out others insulting people, yet you just insulted me and some other person and see no problem in it. All because i disagree with you. Quite the fascist approach.

You both are overtly hypocritical. You insult, yet act victimized against retaliation. You demand more detailed facts, yet provide none on your own. You call me out for having a "Black and White" viewpoint, yet i am the only one who has shown the ability for compromise. Looking back over the other posts, you just want to attack ANYONE who disagrees with you on the subject.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 29, 2007 9:01 AM

*Yawn*

You're worse than AURaptor. Needless to say none of your baseless accusations are worth refuting, and 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.

Continue to troll and call me names, I will not reply again, because all you are doing is proving me right.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

Promises, Promises. Thats what you said last time.

Your ignorance is marvelous.

Quote:
none of your baseless accusations are worth refuting

Admits he has no intent to discuss anything he doesn't agree with.

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

First it is inability and recognize. If you are going to try and sound smart, at least spell the words right. Second, I believe I brought data from ACTUAL renowned journalistic sources. You fellows brought 7 year old bias data on the music industry that was completely irrelevant. However, that would hinder your argument so I see why you keep ignoring that.

YOU keep calling me a troll, yet here you go acting like a victim again.

It suddenly occurs to me why Joss doesn't post here regularly like at Whedonesque and Bronzebeta. If he had to put up with such Mental Retardation he would probably retire.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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.

Don't you just love being right? Ignorant, mentally retarded, spelling corrections (some of which are wrong). Man I'm an oracle for this stuff I swear.

Anyway, I've said what I want, you or Sigma want to weigh in? Jack? Dead topic?

EDIT: Some of which are wrong because 'Z' is americanised spellings, 'S' is British, which also means original English, so technically more correct, being English rather than Americanese, and this being an English speaking board...

Only Trolls use petty spelling corrections IsAll...

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, January 29, 2007 8:09 PM

Quote:
spelling corrections (some of which are wrong)

i knew it was too good to be true.

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.

Both correct revisions my friend. Christ, there is a spell checker, use it.

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.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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

You're right, more often than not the piracy appears to help to get people to buy a movie or show, rather than take no interest in it at all. What got me started on Firefly was the movie, although I didn't get to go see it in theaters I remembered it a year or so later and downloaded it offline. Then I was extremely curious to know the rest of the story and then went on to download the series. And yes, both were illegal. But I ended up loving them both so much that I wanted to get them on DVD, to do what little I could to support Firefly and Serenity and to have the real, concrete copies of them. I also wanted the special features, usually illegal downloads don't have them. Since I didn't have the money to buy the movie when I liked that, then the show's DVDs when I liked those even more, I kept my downloads and watched them repeatedly until I could afford to buy the movie and I got someone else to buy me the DVDs as a gift. Now, because I originally illegally downloaded the movie, I have both sitting on my desk and I just finished watching an episode of the show from the DVD. So there are the downsides of questionable legality and the realities of some people just downloading and not buying, it does broaden the show's viewer base and will lead to more people buying it than never hearing about it and never being able to witness it. If you can originally see something for free and love it enough, you'll go buy it. Why do you buy movies after you see them in the movie theater? Why do you buy shows on DVD that you see on TV?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:20 AM

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.

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."

BWAH!

TCM

*Download my Firefly Games for FREE at
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=13&t=12622
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In or near Ohio? Join us!
http://p097.ezboard.com/bohiofireflyfans
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/firefly-ohio

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, February 17, 2007 1:51 PM

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.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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."

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?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 18, 2007 9:11 AM

Could you please just make it stranger? Stranger. Odder. Could be weirder. More bizarre. How about uncanny?

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?

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...
;)

Keep Flyin'!

BWAH!

TCM

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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...
;)

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.

Not everything is black and white no, but stealing IS stealing.

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.

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.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 18, 2007 4:12 PM

Could you please just make it stranger? Stranger. Odder. Could be weirder. More bizarre. How about uncanny?

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.

EXACTLY. They will NOT BUY pirated material. It will be LOANED to them by others, and IF they like it enough, they go out and BUY the real thing. I never said anyone would BUY pirated material, but some folks do.

Quote:
Not everything is black and white no, but stealing IS stealing.

And stealing is defined as taking something that is not yours. This is where a true difference of opinion begins, and I'm not here to debate what INFORMATION is or isn't ownable. What I am discussing is how "stolen" (to appease you...) material somehow causes a company to lose money when folks, who were not reached by the marketing (meaning they either never saw it, or they were not inspired enough by it) said company published, that would never have bought their product in the first place, legally, illegally or etched into rice...

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.

I did. You just don't like the answer and you hang on ideology (such as "stealing is stealing"). And where the hell does ANGST come in?

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.

Hey, if you've already read the thread, then why are you still here? I simply offered up one more explanation to someone who said they didn't get it. Perhaps you could add something useful yourself next time, like maybe some facts or proof that a ripped DVD won't or can't help the sales. You are arguing from the assumption that because it is "bad to steal" it can't help. Well, it is also wrong to kill (to some folks) and yet you sit here today, with the opportunity to voice your opinions because people have killed and have been killed to create the society that allows you to do it (unless of course you are from one of those countries that don't allow it, and now your days are numbered for using the freedom of speech, to spread your "information", that you don't have, and would equally see others not have that freedom).

BTW - I'll be copying everything you say here, and posting it elsewhere for others to see, because I've always wanted to pirate what is yours, and soon everyone who cares about what you have to say will have a FREE copy of it, until you stop them.

Dude, you really need to grow up and face reality. Not everyone in the 'verse is like you, thinks like you, nor wants to be like you. And that goes for me too. I realize this. All I am saying is pirated information does not cost a company sales for stuff people wouldn't have bought anyways because they were not aware of it. Sure it costs them a sale here or there, but then it is made up 2x, 5x, 10x, 100x over in some cases.

Ask yourself, how many people are still watching Firefly on the VHS (or DVD burns of VHS) episodes that sold on ebay a few years back? Right. And how many of them do you think ran right out and bought the DVD sets when they were released?

This isn't some tape of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky having sex, this is art, and more importantly, storytelling, that was meant to be shared. It is not government secrets, or secret BigMac sauce, it is television that was broadcast freely over airwaves. VHS didn't destroy networks or movie studios, did it? If it had, this discussion would be moot.

Again, to simply state something:
COPYRIGHT laws exist to prevent individuals and companies from stealing other peoples content in order to CLAIM IT AS THEIR OWN for profit.

So long as you give credit to the originator (No Shakespeare in the "original Klingon" please!) and don't try to make money selling it, it shouldn't be a problem, save for the lawyers who have twisted the laws themselves, and that is a rant for another thread...

So, in conclusion (because I know you love me being long-winded!), as long as you do not burn copies of SERENITY AND sell them AND/OR claim that SERENITY is your own movie that you made, you're actually not doing anything but passing information to potentially interested consumers (who, by definition, consume...as in: BUY STUFF...)

BWAH!

TCM

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 18, 2007 4:36 PM

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.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 18, 2007 4:50 PM

Could you please just make it stranger? Stranger. Odder. Could be weirder. More bizarre. How about uncanny?

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.

Right. So your a crotchety OLD pacifist lawyer. Got it. And you yourself add nothing to this thread, except to continue to goad responses. So this, for what I am sure you will claim as "victory", will be my last in this thread.

First of all, I am most likely OLDER than you "pong" (yes, I played it in its original form).

Secondly, I can say 'Verse' all I want. As this "murderous society" has given me that right.

Lastly, you obviously AREN'T a Fan, Flan, Browncoat, or anything recognizable as such, as evidenced by your derogatory remarks to the same.
Hence, why this is my final comment to you. I will discuss/argue/debate with anyone else who wants to, but I don't come to this FAN site to be belittled by trolls like you. You can type all you want in response, but I will ignore you and give you your "victory over the heathen proginator of EVIL" you seek, as I have already given you more credence than you deserve. Why don't you find someplace where your philosophy is more widely accepted and stop getting your rocks off getting a rise out of others, who you disagree with, by exibiting your lack of knowledge and imposed morality?

Good day, Sir/Madam/Troll.

BWAH!

TCM

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:06 PM

You guys must be used to people backing down from bully tactics. Cause all it takes is a few discrediting remarks and you guys leave in a hurry. I hope you keep your word. Cause i don't think i can stomach anymore of your BORING ramblings.

I am not a fan huh? Yeah considering i actually watched the show in its original airing. I was a fan of Joss before firefly. I watched Buffy from day one. So insisting that a person should make a living off the art i support is now a sign you aren't a true fan. Ok. Sure.

Being a member of a little fan site, doesn't make you a fan. Nor does packing on a few Sig pics. Liking a show/Movie about pirates, doesn't give you the right to pirate the said show/movie.

You addressed me. So don't get mad when i respond.

Had you read the thread you responded to, you'd know i don't have a problem with piracy. Just the piracy of someone you are supposed to be a fan of. And the piracy of material that is not intended to widen the fan base of the verse, but to prohibit the need to buy something. Thats is what the HDDVD rip is. I have justified all my claims as much as anyone else.

But then again, reading as it appears, is not you strongest attribute.

I see that you call a troll anyone with a different belief than yourself. I am ok with that.

Enjoy Math class in the morning.

Pack a lunch.

Sleep tight.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:11 PM

GHOULFISH

I dont mind piracy in general - it only annoys me when people start selling the stuff they pirate.

Me thinks that anyone who pirates Serenity would probably see how good the movie was and buy a copy. Thats what a friend of mine does. Pirates like 20 shows a year - whatchs them and buys the good ones so he can whatch them again.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, February 18, 2007 6:34 PM

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

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?

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.

And, you telling him to "enjoy math class in the morning" doesn't help your case at all.

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.

Rules and voting: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=22892

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

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?

I have never said stealing is good.I just dont understand how you can put on one face (a fan) the support doing something that might hurt that.

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.

i know, my point was, him being a member of a fansite doesn't make him one either.

Quote:

And, you telling him to "enjoy math class in the morning" doesn't help your case at all.

That wasn't meant to help my case, my case had been made. Nobody has STILL addressed how a 20 gig file which is NOT intended for casual viewing that would bring in new viewers, helps the verse. VHS and Cassette rips from 16-20 years ago have no correlation with DVD rips NOW.

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.

It MAY be followed more, if some people weren't so hostile too others.

Quote:
TCM's first comment to me:
"If ignorance is bliss, then you're the happiest person in the universe."

I have approached everyone, even those i disagree with in a respectful manner until they get personal. I refuse to be bullied around because some people apparently don't have to follow the rules. Other people i got into "heated" arguments with got quite rude and personal more times than with just me, and as i've browsed other articles i see its a common practice for them.

btw

i missed this:

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.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, well put.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:56 AM

WINDSTRUCK

This discussion has gone on too long already.

I rejoice that the DRM is broken and it's shiny that it was Serenity.

****
About the issue of Pirating Serenity's HD DVD.

Anything above 500MB I won't download! (Ok I'm poor!)

I do understand PONG's point. If we buy Legal DVDs we are INDEED helping Joss. Or helping Joss more.

I also do understand Citizen and others (sorry can't remember

) point. That having serenity(includes HD DVD) in P2P will help cover a larger ground of people that will be exposed to the movie and the possiblity that they will buy the legal copy of it.

HERE'S MY TAKE ON THE ISSUE:

@PONG

I don't think you are defending the piracy issue. I think you are not anti-piracy. I know you want what's best for the verse.

I agree that buying the legal copies will help Joss, and it will help more. More legal copies of BDM sold, more help for Joss. And it is a more positive promotion of the movie.

This is a 100% WIN SITUATION. I hope I got your point across?

Btw, It was a shock when you said that someone's argument was childish. Some people will not take that easily you know. It could come across as a personal attack.

@CITIZEN and THE GUYZ/GALZ

I think having HD DVD of Serenity cracked was really cool and having it on a P2P is great. Since more people will have access to it. Cover more grounds and recruit more browncoats, I like the idea.

I understand what you are trying to point out that it will not harm the movie or the sales of the DVD if we download it. I do not see immediate harm to it.

Although this indeeds promote the movie, this is also a risk... There is a risk that they would buy the legal copy or they wouldn't. But that is the risk that P2P softwares are offering to those who want to try before they buy. I'd like to try before buying.

<<<----------->>>

The point that P2P harms or benefits the BDM, I cannot say. But buying legal copies will definitely benefit Joss and the BDH and the studio without risk.

If they don't like movie then they discard it, then the movie gains nothing. If they like the movie and buys the copy, then we gain something. If they like the movie but don't buy it, then do you think this is a loss? is it a gain or a just the black or a loss?

Personally, I don't know.

If we take the risk of DLing the movie, and maybe possibly get more browncoats and more legal copies sold, then GOOD! or should I say SHINY!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:39 AM