Bullets 'n' Babes

Lourdes wrote:I'd download it and if it was any good I'd buy it. Same as I always do.

Go watch it at the theatre. Then, when you come out you should judge whether you wanna buy the film or not.

I'm so happy I have experienced certain films at the theatre and not on a crappy PC monitor.

Lourdes wrote:I'd download it and if it was any good I'd buy it. Same as I always do.

Now this thinking has a certain logic to it, in that it follows the music industry as an example. It's a 'try before you buy' scenario (kinda like radio playing a track before its release), but has a flaw in the sense that a film might be just 'alright', in which case you wouldn't buy the film. And then nobody gets paid for the film.

bradavon wrote:

thelostdragon wrote:Why should anybody buy a DVD then?

That's an entirely different point from the one I was answering. The two aren't connected.

Didn't you reply to grim, that it was ok to rent a DVD and copy it? They are very well connected.

bradavon wrote:

Kurgan wrote:What about stealing a DVD, copying its contents and then replacing the disc back where you got it from?

That would be wrong as you've still stolen it in the first place but taking it with permission, copying it and then returning it is entirely right IMO.

OK, to take it a step further, what if you've bought the DVD, copied it and then returned it?

thelostdragon wrote:No, I just can't believe this general "It's ok to do illegal stuff"-attitude.

You've not answered my question on whether you've ever recorded off TV, the radio or copied a tape?

Maybe because the answer would go against your argument it's inherently wrong. How is a DVD any different? It's not.

thelostdragon wrote:The film business is the business I am working in and seek to have success in. I don't know if I would want to come to this board anymore if I found out all the people here think it is ok to download my first international film and also do so.

Please read people's comments before assuming shit, and stop overreacting. "I don't know if I would want to come to this board anymore if I found out all the people here think it is ok to download my first international film" get real, some people will and some won't.

I certainly wouldn't as I'd want to support your work but you're intelligent enough to realise some people would. There's very little you can do about it. Piracy has been with us since long before Video and it's not going anywhere any time soon.

We're all talking about mulit-billion dollar companies not small outfits who could really do with the money. That and if you'd read what I said I said buy 99.9% of the films I watch (it being at the cinema or DVD).

But yes in principle you asked so I told you I don't agree it's wrong to copy a DVD.

You're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think people listen or care when companies harp on about it being wrong or more to the point people ever listened when they were told they shouldn't copy tapes (like I said you could literally buy the hardware to do it, off the shelf, in retail stores no hassles at all).

Again like I said there is a massive difference between copying and stealing a physical DVD.

The fact is the film business is a multi-billion dollar business with or without piracy!

So if everybody thought it was ok to do something illegal, I guess it is then.

Well it depends what it is. I come back to my tape to tape point, that should never have been illegal in the first place.

These are only my opinions. I'm fully aware they wouldn't hold up in court but then so does everyone else who copies a tape etc . . .

If you wanna stay in the past, fair enough. Times change and it is not common any longer.

Come on do you really think people's attitudes to a free product have changed? Just look at all the millions who download.

I said it earlier and I'll say it again if Home CD Recorders had taken off like Tape and VCR Recording did there's every chance we'd all be copying CDs maybe not you but the majority of people.

It doesn't seem DVD Recorders will replace DVD Players like VCRs replaced VC Players but it's possible.

at least the TV stations pay the licence fees to the studios, who frankly spoken know exactly that there are people taping their films.

The two aren't in the slightest bit connected. The licence fees you pay is not there to fund piracy.

That doesn't give you the right to steal it.

Like I said I'm not and you'll find based on my original source article you're very much in the minority for thinking it is stealing.

It's not like movies are a basic human need. If you couldn't afford water, it is ok to steal it as that would fall into the category of "theft of food".

Now you're just being pedantic for the sake of it.

But if you don't believe it is stealing, why waste so much money if you can get the same luxury for free?

Like I already said because an MP3 is not a CD and a DivX download is not a DVD. The two aren't identically the same.

Why?

I've already answered that question of which you even replied to so you know why IMO it's not stealing, not in the slightest.

It's about common sense that should tell you, that you should pay if you want to see the work of hard-working people

Tell that to your film studio mates at WB, Universal, Fox and the like, and while you're at it tell them to stop ripping us off. We may then listen.

Like I said I buy 99.9% of the films I watch in one way or another, same goes for music. Go and bitch at someone who actually does do as you say and break the law.

You'll struggle to find many people who agree with you.

Kurgan wrote:How are they ripping you off if you've not bought their products?

Because I do buy their products but it doesn't stop the RRP or retail price from being a rip off. Besides my original point on why they're not the same was not the one you quoted.

Kurgan wrote:Now this thinking has a certain logic to it

There's no logic to that as you're getting it illegally and have no requirement to ever buy it.

thelostdragon wrote:Didn't you reply to grim, that it was ok to rent a DVD and copy it? They are very well connected.

Yes but you're talking about buying not renting and like I've already said you can't compare a copied film to the original product. The end result is never a clone of the original.

Kurgan wrote:OK, to take it a step further, what if you've bought the DVD, copied it and then returned it?

If again you specifically want my opinion and I'm unsure how it's taking it a step further Yes that would be acceptable.

Loads of people do it. As they rent a DVD, copy it and then return it. Fine if you guys don't use your DVD Recorders to copy but many people do.

I did when I first got it but it quickly wore off when I started noticing the drop in quality and discs not playing months later.

The fact is most people consider film and music throw away commodities and as such don't see why they should pay for them. Most people are perfectly happy with an MP3 Album, hell many people download legal music now which has no physical product to hold.

The same goes for films. If it was easier to do (and no I'm not saying it should be) more people would put up with crappy quality DivX or DVD jobs than go to the cinema.

Just look at the far east for proof. Kuala Lumpar when I was there in 2002 used to have 4-5 cinemas, when I was there it had 1 simply because piracy had forced them to close. Why? Because everyone preferred that crappy quality VCD in the comfort of their own home.

Just walk down any street in the far east and you'll see a bigger network of pirate DVDs than many legit companies can output. There are DVDs literally from all over the world.

That's the reality LD. We're in a minority in "collecting" DVDs.

LD, it's very simple. If and when you make a good movie, you make money. If you make a mediocre or bad movie, you'll make less money. Nothing to do with bootlegs, but with quality and people being willing to pay for it (or not)

What if someone wasnt planning on watching your movie, but his friend has downloaded a bootleg and is highly praising it? Word of mouth gets around. In fact, bootlegs and good word of mouth has been the reason why many anime-series have bene picked up for distribution in the west. The same goes for many asian movies.

And Brad, you say these people wouldnt even buy a CD if it's 1 euro. I'm one of those people who WOULD buy CD's if they were about 5 euro's a piece. I do think 10 euro's or more is too expensive for a CD though, when it only has about 10-12 tracks on it. A movie has hundreds, if not thousands of people working on it. A CD just 10, maybe 20... (or when it uses an orchestra, which is rare, there would be more people).

Anyway, I dont download movies off the internet alot. Hell, I rarely download them, and even when I do have them, I very often dont watch them as I dislike watching movies on my PC.
I downloaded Fearless but never watched it. Bought the director's cut.
I downloaded Casino Royale but havent watched it. Will see it in the theater this monday. Most probably will buy the DVD as well.
Downloaded TYG, but had already seen it in the HK cinema. Will buy the DVD when it's cheaper.
Downloaded that thai action flick Born to Fight, quickly browsed through it to check what the action looked like... didnt watch the movie... might buy the DVD eventually.
Etc etc...

So for me it really is just about quickly checking out if I like the look of it, then also obviously looking through reviews and messageboards, and if and when I like it, I'll go see it, and/or buy it. I'm sure I'm nota lone in this, but I'm also sure there are people who will just get the bootleg and save their money to buy their kids some new LEGO or whatever.

Anyway, like I said before. I think NOW is a way better time for independent and starting filmmakers, like LD, then it was 10 years ago.
I think studio's also want to spend less money on big budget blockbusters, in fear of it flopping due too bad quality, bootlegs and word of mouth, and now spend more money on smaller budget movies, so there's much less to lose, and much more to gain.

Please don't believe this fairytale that bootlegs and pirates are costing the industry money, because they're making more money then everrrrrrrr (except maybe the music industry). I know many people who have started buying certain movies after they had gotten into contact with the genre or whatever through bootlegs.

I download silly amounts of films/DVD's. If I like something I'll eventually get it, if I don't then I won't. I like how I can find untouched copies of almost any DVD release, so as well as seeing the film I can compare different versions before I make a purchase.
I don't like buying blind, downloading lets me avoid that. It's often tempting to just burn a copy, especially expensive R2J's but when it comes to DVD's I'd still rather own the original. Even if it does cost a ton I save a lot of money by not buying blindly.

To be honest I've pretty much given up on buying CD's though aside from a few small releases. Relative to the cost of DVD's they are far too expensive and sicne I don't use a CDP I have to rip, encode and tag them. If I could download lossless copies of the music I like for a much lower price than CD's I would. But I can't so I'm left with the choice of expense + hassle vs a perfect lossless download complete with covers for nothing.

Games too are something I'm spending less on. Most modern titles are a joke with day 1 patches and little support. There are very few that I end up buying. With older games I just don't bother at all, you can get them for nothing S/H on eBay but publishers aren't making money from that. A 15-30min download is much easier. If publishers offered downloads of their back catalogue for a few quid a pop I'd jump at it.

I download some foreign TV shows that I would never buy even if they were on DVD but I don't feel bad about it. I never sit down and watch TV. I cap it, strip the ads and watch it at my leisure. No difference with downloading really. Just means I see it sooner.

Ugh, why do we get all these pointless and confusing topic moves. This is a tiny little forum Brad, you take moderating it far too seriously.

And Brad, you say these people wouldnt even buy a CD if it's 1 euro. I'm one of those people who WOULD buy CD's if they were about 5 euro's a piece. I do think 10 euro's or more is too expensive for a CD though, when it only has about 10-12 tracks on it. A movie has hundreds, if not thousands of people working on it. A CD just 10, maybe 20... (or when it uses an orchestra, which is rare, there would be more people).

Fair enough then. Would they make a profit on a 5 Euro CD though? Maybe I'm not sure. I bet it costs conciderabely more to make and market a CD than you think.

There's more to an album than just the people who actually make it. Besides Music and Films are very different mediums. It's the singer/band who is forefront of whether we feel it's worth to pay them money.

That and it needs to be remember for your 20 Euros you'll get a product that if you like you'll use again and again and again. DVDs you pay your 20 Euros and it may get used half a dozen times maximum.

Anyway, I dont download movies off the internet alot. Hell, I rarely download them, and even when I do have them, I very often dont watch them as I dislike watching movies on my PC.

My Hard Disk/DVD Recorder plays DivX , very well actually.

Anyway, like I said before. I think NOW is a way better time for independent and starting filmmakers, like LD, then it was 10 years ago.

Actually so do I. The world is easily big enough to accommodate legal and illegal work without anyone suffering.

except maybe the music industry

That too is bollocks. CD Singles sales are down but guess what Legal Singles Downloads are up. Oh look a pattern. All those people buying CD Singles must have gone somewhere. They sure didn't ALL migrate to illegal sites.

Album sales aren't do baldy either.

Relative to the cost of DVD's they are far too expensive and sicne I don't use a CDP I have to rip, encode and tag them.

Not when you consider you'd use a CD much more but yes if you only end up ripping them anyway I see your point.

Tagging though isn't an issue when sites like CDDB link into all ripping tools anyway. The tagging on illegal download sites is usually atrocious, another reason I prefer ripping as the tags there are usually spot on.

expense + hassle

They cost the same as DVDs and take minutes to rip. Except for the fact you need to wait for the CD to arrive it's far easier to rip an album than download it.

LD is in for a shock when he next sees this thread

bradavon wrote:Album sales aren't do baldy either.

bradavon wrote:

thelostdragon wrote:No, I just can't believe this general "It's ok to do illegal stuff"-attitude.

You've not answered my question on whether you've ever recorded off TV, the radio or copied a tape?

Yes, I have answered that question. I'll answer it again for you. I recorded films off TV until I was about 14.

I even download stuff, but only if it is OOP and there is no DVD release in the forseeable future.

Please read people's comments before assuming shit, and stop overreacting.

So I'm overreacting when I condemn illegal actions?

"I don't know if I would want to come to this board anymore if I found out all the people here think it is ok to download my first international film" get real, some people will and some won't. I certainly wouldn't as I'd want to support your work but you're intelligent enough to realise some people would. There's very little you can do about it.

Brad, I am well aware of that. But it would hurt me to find out that people who know me and people who I actually like were doing this. I know that I can't stop film piracy. It's not like I'm being unrealistic here. However, I don't have to accept piracy as a standard due to this.

Piracy has been with us since long before Video and it's not going anywhere any time soon.

THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT AN OK THING TO DOOOOO! Dudes, am I talking to vegetables here, lol.
PEOPLE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN STEALING AND ROBBING. WHY SHOULD THE COPS CATCH THIEVES AFTER ALL?

That and if you'd read what I said I said buy 99.9% of the films I watch (it being at the cinema or DVD).

Brad, I read what you wrote and I assume you do buy 99% of your home entertainment, yes even the dildos as they are hard to copy. I'm not talking about you here, but about your views and supporters of bootlegging in general.

You're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think people listen or care when companies harp on about it being wrong or more to the point people ever listened when they were told they shouldn't copy tapes.

I never even implied that I thought people would care.

Again like I said there is a massive difference between copying and stealing a physical DVD.

Yes, you are more likely to get caught in the physical theft.

The fact is the film business is a multi-billion dollar business with or without piracy!

It still doesn't right the wrongs. I'm the first one in line to sign a paper that the money in the world is divided unfairly. That doesn't give me the right to steal from the rich people, though, only if I was starving or in need of something important and not just luxury.

bradavon wrote:

thelostdragon wrote:So if everybody thought it was ok to do something illegal, I guess it is then.

Well it depends what it is.

Since when do civilians make the law in a democracy?

These are only my opinions. I'm fully aware they wouldn't hold up in court but then so does everyone else who copies a tape etc . . .

I'm really no fan of all this "everyone else does it"-attitude. Sorry.

Come on do you really think people's attitudes to a free product have changed?

Keyword: Free. It's not. Home entertainments are luxury goods, like it or not. Some can afford them and others can't. There is no reason one should pay for them while other don't. If people don't have money and are used to getting their entertainment for free, trust me... they won't all of a sudden start buying their movies once they are a bit wealthier.

Just look at all the millions who download.

Brad, that's not a good point.

The two aren't in the slightest bit connected. The licence fees you pay is not there to fund piracy.

I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about RTL (German TV station) paying Warner Bros. money in order to get the rights to air "LotR" for example.

bradavon wrote:

thelostdragon wrote:It's not like movies are a basic human need. If you couldn't afford water, it is ok to steal it as that would fall into the category of "theft of food".

Now you're just being pedantic for the sake of it.

No, brad, that's just the way it is. Like it or not, but look at the facts. Movies are luxury goods, just like mp3-players and books. I wish we lived in (can't remember the place and period) where it was obligatory to visit theatre plays at least once in a year and that one visit was state-aided. But these days it's not and if a person does not have the money to go to the theatre or buy a DVD, then he simply can't.

Like I already said because an MP3 is not a CD and a DivX download is not a DVD. The two aren't identically the same.

You know you can steal stuff even if it wasn't physical material. How about texts? Say someone steals the content of your website? He didn't physically steal it. I ask you, what else did he do with it?

Tell that to your film studio mates at WB, Universal, Fox and the like, and while you're at it tell them to stop ripping us off. We may then listen.

We? I thought you weren't downloading? Anyway, why are they ripping you off? You know what you are buying and I am sure you are able to evaluate whether the purchase is worth the money or not.

Like I said I buy 99.9% of the films I watch in one way or another, same goes for music. Go and bitch at someone who actually does do as you say and break the law.

I'll bitch at you as long as you represent the idea that downloading is OK. It's people like you who give other people the impression that it is OK.

Loads of people do it. As they rent a DVD, copy it and then return it.

What's new? Dude, the point is not how many people do it. We all know they are in the millions. It is a widely spread SICK HABBIT.

bradavon wrote:

Relative to the cost of DVD's they are far too expensive and sicne I don't use a CDP I have to rip, encode and tag them.

Not when you consider you'd use a CD much more but yes if you only end up ripping them anyway I see your point.

Tagging though isn't an issue when sites like CDDB link into all ripping tools anyway. The tagging on illegal download sites is usually atrocious, another reason I prefer ripping as the tags there are usually spot on.

expense + hassle

They cost the same as DVDs and take minutes to rip. Except for the fact you need to wait for the CD to arrive it's far easier to rip an album than download it.

I might listen to a CD more but they cost little less than a full on film which costs oh so much more to make and I'll get more out of.

Now if I could download lossless music that I actually wanted for a third of the price... All the legal download services have crap quality and poor selections.

By the way though a proper EAC lossless rip takes 20-30 mins. I can download the same in under 10.

Yi-Long wrote:LD, it's very simple. If and when you make a good movie, you make money. If you make a mediocre or bad movie, you'll make less money. Nothing to do with bootlegs, but with quality and people being willing to pay for it (or not).

Yi, even if I was to make the best movie in the world (as if there was such a thing), it wouldn't turn those people used to downloading into sudden buyers of DVDs. I doubt that my mate at work, who does nothing else than downloading the whole day (hell, if he could download food, he would) would buy a film only because it is awesome.

I've never downloaded a movie as such - though I have watched a couple via You Tube streaming. So happens they were films I wouldn't have paid for at any rate. I've never copied a rental. If I like something I'll go buy it. I admit I would - and have - watch(ed) copies made by others. So maybe that makes me a bit of a hypocrite? But I don't steal myself. To me it's the people posting the films that are the criminals not those downloading as we pay for our PCs and our internet broadband so anything that's free is appealing. If someone here posted a link that led to a decent quality version of a film we wanted to see at no cost I think most of us would check it out. This isn't a black and white issue.

Yi-Long wrote:Anyway, like I said before. I think NOW is a way better time for independent and starting filmmakers, like LD, then it was 10 years ago.
I think studio's also want to spend less money on big budget blockbusters, in fear of it flopping due too bad quality, bootlegs and word of mouth, and now spend more money on smaller budget movies, so there's much less to lose, and much more to gain.

Good point actually. However, the a lot of film financers of independent movies have become the real directors.

Please don't believe this fairytale that bootlegs and pirates are costing the industry money.

You seem pretty well damn sure about this. Any first hand info?

Markgway wrote:If someone here posted a link that led to a decent quality version of a film we wanted to see at no cost I think most of us would check it out.

Again the keyword: No Cost. To me, free (or no cost) means if it is authorised by the studio.

A film like "9/11 Lose Change" is really for free as it is offered for download by the makers of it.

bradavon wrote:There's no logic to that as you're getting it illegally and have no requirement to ever buy it.

What you actually mean to say is that it's not a legal defence. Logic is something else, as you seem to be saying with this whole thread.

If again you specifically want my opinion and I'm unsure how it's taking it a step further Yes that would be acceptable.

I'd say it's taking it a step further, as it removes the hypothetical theft of the DVD and moves purely to copying the film from the DVD for personal gain.
And that is, in my opinion, what a lot of this boils down to. People that beg, steal or borrow a DVD with the intent of returning it once they've copied it are stealing. People that download a film, with no intention of purchasing it, are stealing. People that download a film with a view to using it as an evaluation as to whether or not to buy the DVD can say just that. It doesn't make it legal in the first instance, but they can say that they are making amends by owning the film in a legitimate format and for not necessarily at huge personal expense. But to hide behind some wishy-washy "I'm fighting the injustice and greed of the corporate fatcats" thinking is just bollocks. It's being done for personal gain, just as the studios are in it for personal gain. Films and music aren't a right though, they're a luxury. I'm entitled to the air I breathe, I'm not entitled to watch a film. It's something I choose to do.
From the point of view of a studio, they can't really afford to take the risk of distributing a film for free, on the basis that people will pay up afterwards if they liked it. Unlike software, which can be distributed on a shareware or demo basis, films induce a variety of emotions which are only new the first time you watch a film. So to ensure that the system keeps on working, they charge in the first instance for people to watch.
Again, just my opinion

thelostdragon wrote:So I'm overreacting when I condemn illegal actions?

I was referring to your off the wall statement you wouldn't post at a forum if members downloaded movies, of which I can bet they already are.

Home entertainments are luxury goods, like it or not. Some can afford them and others can't. There is no reason one should pay for them while other don't.

Yes thank you Mr. Obvious I appreciate DVDs are a luxury items. That's so far removed from the original point that piracy is acceptable or unacceptable however.

It's people like you who give other people the impression that it is OK.

Now you're really talking bullshit. I give my opinion and somehow I speak for the nation. The fact is the vast majority of people do think it's okay and nothing you or anyone else says is going to change that.

If we did a straw poll I bet at last 50% of Bullets members have watched a pirated copy (it being DVD, Download or whatever) in there life, the other 50% would own at least 1 bootleg CD, Tape or whatever.

Get off your throne of piracy is wrong bollocks you're a one man band. If you didn't work in the film business you'd probably like 95% of the rest of the population be watching pirate DVDs (in one way or another).

Even Mark whose never downloaded or copied a film has done it.

And stop talking pretentious nonsense that we're someone how causing the film business serious ill. They're a multi-billion dollar business so bloody what they lose a few million. I really don't care and neither do most other people.

I'm stealing from no one but clearly all the marketing mumbo jumbo has washed off on at least one person.

Again I'm not including smaller outfits like yourself in this point.

Comparing food to DVDs is a ridiculous argument to the point I can't even be bothered to argue against it.

You seem pretty well damn sure about this. Any first hand info?

They're hardly likely to publish such statistics. No doubt it would be easy to provide statistics to state the opposite but then stats are easily moulded to suit the persons gain. Like all these sorts of things stats and news reports can be created to show one thing and another will show a completely different point of view.

Kurgan wrote:What you actually mean to say is that it's not a legal defence.

No but that to.

People that download a film with a view to using it as an evaluation as to whether or not to buy the DVD can say just that. It doesn't make it legal in the first instance, but they can say that they are making amends by owning the film in a legitimate format and for not necessarily at huge personal expense.

That in reality is a load of old bollocks though as the reality is that's an excuse to get around the fact they own it illegally. Try before you buy simply doesn't happen.

I'm fighting the injustice and greed of the corporate fatcats

Personally I've no interest in fighting shit. I'm just stating my reasons why the whole argument that it's wrong and immoral are IMO bollocks.

Kurgan wrote:Album sales aren't do baldy either.

Oops another classic typo of mine

Where's Tom when you need him?

bradavon wrote:

Kurgan wrote:What you actually mean to say is that it's not a legal defence.

No but that to.

So, what logic do you subscribe to? Just to reiterate it, as there've been a fair few posts now, and it does well to help people get an update as to what someone's views are, without them having to trawl though previous pages
My personal views are that downloading a film that you've no intention of purchasing on DVD, regardless of how good the film is or isn't, is stealing, in the sense that you are attempting to own something that you have not paid for that isn't a God-given right(don't want to get dragged off onto a different topic here; just think of it as a turn of phrase and leave it be ). I don't think it is different to stealing a DVD from a shop; just because you can visualise the place you've nicked it from, doesn't make it any less illegal and nor does it mean that someone further down the line hasn't made a loss on it. This applies doubly if you do what you said you'd do and buy a DVD, copy it and then take it back, because then the person you've 'stolen' from is the shop you've bought it from. They sold you something for a given price and after making yourself a copy of it, you've returned it in order to get your money back.

Downloading a film to 'preview' with the intention of purchasing if it happens to be good, isn't stealing in the same sense. It's still stealing legally speaking, but it's something that can be justified in a manner that actually results in all parties being treated fairly. If a film is crap, I don't see why one should pay hard-earned/won/stolen money to own it, which should in turn, make them strive to create a better film next time. Conversely, if the film is good, I will want to own it. Here, the proper chain can be observed and your favourite on-line retailer can stand to make a bit of cash for delivering to you a shiny platter.

The only time that this doesn't apply is the cinema. If you are unwilling to part with your cash to see a new film in a way that can't be really be replicated at home (and again, let's not get dragged off here onto the merits and demerits of cinemas ), but you are willing to see the film in a dodgy cam-job or something, then that's not fair either, as the film is the thing suffering here; the thing that you are attempting to gauge is the the film's quality. If you're attempting to judge a film on how good it is, then it's only fair you should watch it in a manner that presents it as a director wants it shown. Handheld footage chopping the top half of the screen isn't really representative of this.

bradavon wrote:That in reality is a load of old bollocks though as the reality is that's an excuse to get around the fact they own it illegally. Try before you buy simply doesn't happen.

tom2681 wrote:Re: pirates:
Stealing from a store is wrong because you're stealing a media.
Downloading/Copying a movie is OK because you're not stealing from anyone.

What these idiots don't understand is:
Let's say I want to watch a specific film. I won't go directly to the theater and spend 8€ without knowing whether I'll like the film.

So I'm downloading it (a screener or a DVD-Rip) or I'm buying a cheap bootleg.
-If I like it, then I'll go to the theater and then I'll buy the DVD.
-If I don't like it, then I'll delete it and that'll be it.

Tom seems to go with the basis of 'try-before-you-buy'. (Hey, if you're going to to use the "Everybody else does it, why can't we? (thank you, Cranberries ) defence, then I can call Tom as my first witness )

As for the "I'm not interested in fighting shit" thing, well, what else does the image of Robin Hood (from the first post in this thread) conjure, aside from fighting the good fight against an unjust system?
If you're going to steal something, then don't hide behind a defence like that. Man up, and admit that it's stealing.

It's past 6 in the morning, so forgive the rambling nature of my posts. I just can't get to fucking sleep.

thelostdragon wrote:It's not about what the law says only. It's about common sense that should tell you, that you should pay if you want to see the work of hard-working people, who request money from the viewers. I don't sneak into a theater play either, do I?

I have to agree with LD on that one about DVDs, It IS stealing, though of course I taped off radio and TV back in the day, I even had a tape to tape machine thingy. I admit I have a DVD-R of Fist of Legend as well - but I have never stolen or copied DVDs myself.

As for it being illegal, well... I didnt know that about taping films off TV but why are VCRs/blank videos sold if it's illegal to use them?

"Is it wrong to feed a loaf to feed your starving family? And what if your family doesn't like bread? They like DVDs?
And what if, instead of giving the DVDs away, you sold them at a price that was pratically giving them away?"

It's not my practise to have DVD-R's or something when there is a legit alternative available.

Speaking of The Simpsons what about the link you posted LD - "Watch every Simpsons episode online for free!" - I admit I watched a couple of them, was that OK? Were they authorised by the studio?

@LD:
Suffice to say I disagree with your views.

If someone makes a copy of a DVD, it's not stealing.
When I say "it's not stealing", I mean that nobody is losing money because of it.

-Poor guy has no money -> He's not going to buy any legit DVDs.
Might as well let him watch pirate DVDs -> Whether he does it or not, no studio's gonna get his money anyway.

LD wrote:...if I found out all the people here think it is ok to download my first international film

I'll download it first, to see what it's like.
If it's good, then I'll reward you by buying the DVD.

If you don't want me to download it, then I won't.
But you'll lose any chance of getting my money.

LD wrote:you should pay if you want to see the work of hard-working people

YES. UNLESS you have no money.
IMHO: films and music fall into the "culture" category.

Culture isn't a luxury.

Come on dude, if the guy has no money, he should find a way to get it so he can afford DVDs, not sponge off someone else. DVD's aren't a right you know.