Hurt Locker Producers Suing "Tens of Thousands" of Downloaders
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
From the percentage they are talking about, only 1 in 333 people will be sued. I would say the danger zone for being sued is those who downloaded it right after the academy awards, since that's when these law firm begin to monitor.
Also, you have to understand why they are upset. If everyone who illegally downloaded it paid 2 dollars for it they would have more than doubled the amount of money they made from the film.
Also, you have to understand why they are upset. If everyone who illegally downloaded it paid 2 dollars for it they would have more than doubled the amount of money they made from the film.
The movie who's story basis is pulled out a mans life with no compensation to him is suing OTHER PEOPLE?
Cute
Cute
Yeah, any company that treated my personal privacy as collateral damage in order to seek out and punish people who are not their customers is nothing I would like to do business with. I only hope more people agree.
Good luck guys...here's hoping you waste as little money as possible with this.
Good luck guys...here's hoping you waste as little money as possible with this.
That seems, idiotic to say the least, and prejudiced at most. The Hurt locker is an American movie about Americans, it barely lasted two weeks in cinemas my way. not to mention that the US has the greatest proportion of people using bittorrent in the owrld (1 in 5 people connected to the internet use bittorrent is the US).Cod of War said:
It's not idiotic or prejudiced at all, it's true.Doitpow said:
If you ever go to China (do, it's a weird and interesting place) you quickly find out that they have piracy down to a well honed and industrial scale business, copyright law for non-Chinese anything practically doesn't exist.
Alright, put your life savings into self publishing a CD and I'll come steal it from you.Xvito said:
Welcome to 2010, where the common business practice is to file legal action against your consumer base because as an industry, you decided to move toward a digital medium that can be easily duplicated and moved electronically to save money.
That's like saying "we're going to make all cars without door locks or requirement for ignition keys, but please don't take a car you see because it's morally wrong."
Actually that's wrong... it's more like saying "we made a car that can be infinitely duplicated and reproduced without need for physical materials, but please don't make cars for all your friends and family even though you love them and don't want them to have to spend money too, because it really hurts car manufacturers."
If you had a television or car that was nice and you could duplicate with the press of a button and instantly transport to other people in your life so that they too could have a TV or a car identical to yours... for free... would you not do it? If you were given one of these duplicated items, would you not also duplicate them so that everyone else you know could have one too?
There's a reason it's called "file sharing," and instead of innovating business models or moving toward an industry format that isn't ridiculously easy to distribute and duplicate, the companies are electing to make their "perceived appropriate" profit margins by litigating their userbase. [strong]Piracy is a total misnomer... pirates take something "away" from someone to the point that they no longer have said item.[/strong] Piracy is what they did in the Middle Eastern seas with guns and large boats. File duplication and distribution, while not the most morally right thing to do in your life, is not piracy. The only people who should be prosecuted against are the people that profit monetarily from said duplication.
That's like saying "we're going to make all cars without door locks or requirement for ignition keys, but please don't take a car you see because it's morally wrong."
Actually that's wrong... it's more like saying "we made a car that can be infinitely duplicated and reproduced without need for physical materials, but please don't make cars for all your friends and family even though you love them and don't want them to have to spend money too, because it really hurts car manufacturers."
If you had a television or car that was nice and you could duplicate with the press of a button and instantly transport to other people in your life so that they too could have a TV or a car identical to yours... for free... would you not do it? If you were given one of these duplicated items, would you not also duplicate them so that everyone else you know could have one too?
There's a reason it's called "file sharing," and instead of innovating business models or moving toward an industry format that isn't ridiculously easy to distribute and duplicate, the companies are electing to make their "perceived appropriate" profit margins by litigating their userbase. [strong]Piracy is a total misnomer... pirates take something "away" from someone to the point that they no longer have said item.[/strong] Piracy is what they did in the Middle Eastern seas with guns and large boats. File duplication and distribution, while not the most morally right thing to do in your life, is not piracy. The only people who should be prosecuted against are the people that profit monetarily from said duplication.
Lol, except that nobody with a modicum of intelligence is going to get charged.Orange Monkey said:
"Pwned" is a terrible word.
I wonder how streamers will do?
Well it's more like he'll sell 13 million CDs then you'll steal one, copy it and give to people who weren't going to buy it but still. But his real problem is people <url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.194144-Used-Game-Sales-are-a-Bigger-Problem-Than-Piracy>returning CDs they didn't like or got bored of.fix-the-spade said:
Let's be realistic here, these are educated people that know exactly what they are doing. They aren't interested in getting back money that they didn't even earn in the first place. They just want to scare some people away from file sharing. That's all.
That's probably the biggest issue they are facing, convincing people that copyright violation is a crime. File sharing is so easy and convenient that it's extremely difficult for anyone to perceive it as "wrong." And that's why they want to portray file sharers as criminals.
That's probably the biggest issue they are facing, convincing people that copyright violation is a crime. File sharing is so easy and convenient that it's extremely difficult for anyone to perceive it as "wrong." And that's why they want to portray file sharers as criminals.