Dumbo's Clone

[Koliedrus]

My kids are, well, kids. They drag toys out of the toybox and leave them on the floor like little land-mines just waiting to cause a stone bruise.

Now that my daughter knows how to operate the DVD player, crunching one underfoot causes pain of a different sort.

From this (http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/ptech/11/12/new.dvd.copy.ap/index.html), I'm wondering if I shouldn't get my ass in gear and go here (http://www.dvdxcopy.com/) before it's no longer an option.

[morgana]

<font color="lime">i wonder if the guy would see the irony in me downloading his dvd copying program for free off of the internet.</font>

[Koliedrus]

Originally posted by morgana
<font color="lime">i wonder if the guy would see the irony in me downloading his dvd copying program for free off of the internet.</font>

But that would be intentional piracy.

Hold on... My thoughts are stuck in a loop...

Nevermind. Don't wait for me. Discuss.

[MAC]

here we go again...............

[political tripe]
what we need her guys is a very exacting law that includes only ou rfears while preserving our rights under judicial review and safe from the terrorism of data-pirates. maybe th edemocrats and republicans can cometogether to stop this befor eit goes to far and we all pay dearly for walt disneys lost revenue
[/political tripe]

My HUMBLE Opinion:

you bought the dvd/video game/audio cd
you can do any goddamn thing you want to with it except sell it for a profit

on to the next problem

[Koliedrus]

This is still a problem. It can't be easily dismissed.

It could be that I'm anxious to take advantage of the technology before someone comes along and tells me that it's illegal. One side has much more money than the other (where's Muffy?)

The Scout in me say's that I shouldn't. The Father in me say's that I should.

I'm currently leaning toward protecting my DVDs as a form of personal insurance. If I step on one, it's gone.

Then there's the TechnoGeek in me that say's that a powerful block of code should be preserved.

My Lawyer-self sides with Hollywood but I tend to spit when I go there.

As a consumer, the ability to preserve my puchases in case of accident supercedes legalities being fought.

As a father and provider, the re-purchase of a copy of Dumbo is food taken away from the mouths of my children.

Free is good, though. The wheel of iron continues to spin...

[Venus]

Am I the only one who understands the problem Hollywood has with this? The actors are paid to entertain you. In order for them to get paid, the movies have to creat an income. If copying DVDs becomes something anyone can do for anyone at any time, Hollywood doesn't make that money they have to pay the actors. Everyone gets their entertainment for free. If Hollywood can't pay the actors, the actors won't act. Then you don't have your DVDs to copy. I wouldn't work for free, neither would you, neither will they.

Same thing with the whole downloading music off the internet. Here's where I get hypocritical. I have CDs that people have made for me from downloaded music. Do I feel bad about that? Well...only a little when I stop to think about it.
It all boils down to the fact that these people get paid for the entertainment they bring you. They get their paychecks from you going to see the movie, buying the DVD, buying their newest CD whatever. You don't like the prices? Fine, don't buy it, but go without. Your boss wouldn't just expect you to work for free because he didn't want to pay you. If there was a way for your boss to get the same work done without having to pay someone for it, you think you'd be working?

[Venus]

Originally posted by Koliedrus

I'm currently leaning toward protecting my DVDs as a form of personal insurance. If I step on one, it's gone.

Then it's your fault for not paying attention to where your DVD is. I understand you have kids. I do too. I have a 2 year old. She doesn't pay attention to where she puts things, so I do. She picks up my CDs and looks at the covers as she walks through my room. I watch to find out where she puts them down. That's just how it works.


Then there's the TechnoGeek in me that say's that a powerful block of code should be preserved.
It's the copyright that should be protected.

My Lawyer-self sides with Hollywood but I tend to spit when I go there.

As a consumer, the ability to preserve my puchases in case of accident supercedes legalities being fought.

As a father and provider, the re-purchase of a copy of Dumbo is food taken away from the mouths of my children.

Then don't buy the DVD player and the DVD. Keep the old VCR, buy the $20. VHS rather than the $40. DVD.

Free is good, though. The wheel of iron continues to spin...

[Koliedrus]

Great. Now I feel guilty for recording Star Trek and Gilligan's Island. Not to mention the audio mixes I made on audio-tape from LPs.

Hell, here I come. My appologies to Stewart Copeland. I thought I was helping.

(In all honesty, no DVDs have been broken here. I'm pre-thinking for the sake of debate. You're all doing great thus far :) )

[Koliedrus]

I forgot to mention Xerox.

I'll shut up for now.

[Escape Artist]

From a profiteering perspective, their current system works great.

DVD/CD breaks? Ha ha, Mr. Consumer! Go buy another - more cash in the corporation bank accounts. Yeah, I'll download practically whatever I want - I used to own half of it. Factor in a few years, and unless you act like an archivist those cd's become unusable. These days, I don't bother buying them.

Now, let's consider this from a manufacturing aspect:

You expect me to pay upwards of $20 for something that is easily broken, takes less effort to produce than my morning shit, I can't copy it, can't loan it to friends, and if the corporations had their way, I can't even put the contents on my computer as MP3/divx?

Err, I can slam my fucking car into a brick wall, at least. God forbid I stick the cd in and hit the rip button.

Know where all that revenue goes? Bank accounts? Maybe a few percentage points actually get funneled to the authors. Y'know, 20 cents per cd royalties. Wait a minute, I'm paying $20! Bit of a quandary there.

As for actors, I laugh at them. They typically have millions in the bank - if they're that concerned about getting more, they should be dragged out into the street and shot for their greed. The work isn't hard, dangerous, or otherwise justifying of their wages.

All these rogue file formats and whatnot are competition, and in an industry where a monopoly looks most profitable to them, they're obviously going to fight to re-establish utter control over the market. If I download stuff, their current system of marketing doesn't work - and they simply don't want that.

Think I'll go open Kazaa. :fuckj00:

[MAC]

venus, dear, actors don't make movies, musicians don't make cd's
they perform for someone else's $$

that someone (who may infact be them under a different company name) PRODUCES the thing

then markets it

granted that's alot of work from start to finish and their names, faces and money has made that product

but you buying a dvd and making yourself a copy isn't wrong

you SELLING it without permission for a profit is WRONG

lets say I buy every seat in the movie theatre for a showing of the new harry potter movie and sit in their all by myself

is that wrong?

what if I give away the tickets for all those seats?

is that wrong?

if you bought a DVD.....you COULD wipe your ass with it if you wanted or you could lock it up forever, never to be seen again

those things don't seem right but what exactly makes them wrong?

Is it that I made 3 copies and gave them to my friends who would NEVER have bought it? well, in the world of copywrites thats exactly it
they assume those ppl would have bought them.....

can I still LEND my one legally purchased movie to my friends?
or is that cutting into the millionaires profits as well?

part of what they sold me when they sold me music and movies was my ability to use it for myself.

Your boss pays you to do tasks and sooner or later you will produce something that will be used after you leave that job and you will get not one penny nor one thank-you for it. You did it because you wanted to and the next guy used it because he liked it.

Its not right, but it ain't wrong.

[Venus]

Ok MAC, going from a right and wrong perspective. If I buy a CD and let a friend borrow it, knowing full well that they will give it back, and then they won't have that CD anymore, no that's not wrong. They listened to it, if they want to have the CD for their own to listen to whenever they want, they can go out and buy the fucker just the same way I did. If I buy two copies of CD, keep one and give the other to my friend is that wrong? No because both copies were bought. If I gave it to someone else, that's fine but they were both paid for. If I copy something that's copyrighted, it's illegal. Why should DVDs or CDs be any different? Because it's possible they'll get scratched or broken? Too damn bad! Take better care of your stuff. I don't have a problem with being able to back up your stuff. The problem here is knowing that some people will use it to get the DVDs and CDs they want for free. That does bother me. They can go out and spend the same ammount of money I did for the same CD. Overpriced? Then don't buy it! Do without! You pay because you want to watch it. You don't want to pay? Guess you don't want to watch the movie. You don't get something for nothing.

[Escape Artist]

Heh, problem is, us masses CAN get something for nothing, and are. Ha ha. :p

Why don't they take the obvious route of improving the product and making it appealing instead of raping consumers and legislators with a rusty knife? Ever see those polls that said "if cd's cost blah-blah I'd buy them?"

I'll bet you don't like getting your paycheck ripped to shreds and a small chunk returned to you by the government - this is similar in that it's not necessary. When businesses cannot make a profit, they change how they're going about it. Those who won't deserve to fail. Economic Darwin's Theory at work here.

[Venus]

Ok, I know you're not trying to tell me that if the companies that make CDs and DVDs gave you a better deal you'd pay for it knowing you could still get it free.

If you were the lead singer for whatever band happens to be your favorite, and your record company came up and told you that they couldn't pay you anymore because people won't buy the CDs anymore because they can get it free, wouldn't you feel that they were the greedy ones? The people that expect you to entertain them free of charge? How long would you continue to make the music for the people? Until you couldn't anymore because you had to get a real job because people are no longer paying you to entertain them?

I'm aware I'm the only one who shares this opinion, and that's ok. It's not the first time it's happened, and I know it won't be the last.

[Escape Artist]

Originally posted by Venus
If you were the lead singer for whatever band happens to be your favorite, and your record company came up and told you that they couldn't pay you anymore because people won't buy the CDs anymore because they can get it free, wouldn't you feel that they were the greedy ones? The people that expect you to entertain them free of charge? How long would you continue to make the music for the people? Until you couldn't anymore because you had to get a real job because people are no longer paying you to entertain them?

So get the job, and market your work on the internet like a shitload of independent artists do. Ask the going rate or $10 less, make a nice amount of change provided your music is appealing to the masses. If your music sucks, you'll go broke - more Darwin Theory there.

They can come here to my house and I'll give them their piddly fucking royalty - just don't expect me to bankroll the industry itself, as it's pretty goddamned oppressive. I'm not going to pay for the shackles they want to use on me and pretend I like it so some artist can make another 20 cents.

[Koliedrus]

Let's see...

I've bought over 30 DVDs. Most are meant for my kids.

I've paid the actors. Now, I'd like to allow my kids to handle the movies without having to make them feel as if the plastic should be treated like gold.

(Obligatory reference to credit cards and the tangent is postponed)

[SimpleSimon]

Originally posted by Escape Artist
So get the job, and market your work on the internet like a shitload of independent artists do. Ask the going rate or $10 less, make a nice amount of change provided your music is appealing to the masses. If your music sucks, you'll go broke - more Darwin Theory there.

They can come here to my house and I'll give them their piddly fucking royalty - just don't expect me to bankroll the industry itself, as it's pretty goddamned oppressive. I'm not going to pay for the shackles they want to use on me and pretend I like it so some artist can make another 20 cents.

Some good points being made in this thread.

Venus, you are not the only one sharing your opinion of the value of protection of artistic/intellectual product - I have purchased exactly one CD in my life for my own use, because I refuse to pay the ridiculously over-inflated prices charged, and I have never downloaded anything from KaZaa or a related site.

EA, you are quite correct in what you say above, but you also freely pirate the artistic/intellectual product of those who chose to market throught the establisdhed music industry channels. What's right about that?

I am not getting holier than thou on you either, I am asking how your statement above justifies your actions?

[Escape Artist]

Originally posted by SimpleSimon
EA, you are quite correct in what you say above, but you also freely pirate the artistic/intellectual product of those who chose to market throught the establisdhed music industry channels. What's right about that?

I'm not saying it's right, per se - I'll freely admit it's stealing...but it's due to the established channels making practically anything else impossible. Hell, a lot of laws passed squander anything produced in the public domain - you ever hear about the guy who couldn't even sell his own music on Ebay?

If I could personally compensate the artists I considered worthy, I would. Even if it were the same exact system sans greedy middlemen, I'd pay the costs involved. Just don't expect me, as a fairly discriminate consumer, to hand my cash over to someone I detest with lofty dreams of the artist who actually did the work getting their slice of the pie. Might as well go outside and torch what cash I have, for all the good it does.

I'd rather take the quasi-illegal route and hit the middlemen where it hurts most - their pocketbooks. If the passive approach worked on anything, we wouldn't pay exorbitant taxes or cd prices...but we do. So much for peace and love.

With that said, to my knowledge artists make more money from tours than they ever will with cd's and the associated royalties. If I ever get off my dead ass, I'll go see a concert or two and be a little more secure in what's done with my money.

Truth be told, I'd ecstatically watch the current system be run into the ground - enterprising people will create an equitable system to replace it in time. Trying to force a market on a populace that neither wants or needs it is just bad economics, though.

[Billyman]

Jeebus H. krist.

Back to the people/company that has brought all this about.

It's really an easy solution. And I can almost guarantee it would shut Hollywood up. 321 should just pay Hollywood royalties for every piece of software it sells.

As for buying DVD's and copying them for protecting your investment. Nothing wrong with that and that should be the consumers right.

Venus, I fully understand where you're coming from and going to, and agree with you to a great extent. However, the "take care of your shit" thing has got to go. Wait until your kid is big enough to really start causing some damage (broken lamps, grill cheese in the vcr, etc) and come back and tell us how easy it is.

But as far as piracy goes. Well, I rent DVD's, not buy, I own a few but being a member of Netflix, I get bookoo's of movies for a low low price. Now granted 321's software prevents a copy from being copied. But what about the original? Now with Netflix I can keep a movie for a year if I wanted to without any late charges. Damn I could make a lot of copies. Now on one side of Hollywood’s money, they got there's when the thousands of legal copies where purchased for rental distribution purposes. Hollywood got theirs. The other side of the Hollywood’s money is if I make all these copies and simply give them away, I haven't broken any laws. But, I, somewhere along the lines, fucked someone out of some money. If I sell those copies, I have done something illegal and not until then.

The boat rocks both ways. It's easy for me to separate the right from wrong. It's also easy to see the legalities. It's just difficult to see a real solution.

Kol, you know what you would be using the software for. If you can use it with a clear conscience, then I see no reason why you shouldn't buy it now and continue protecting your investments. That was intentions to begin with and your right period.

[MuffyTheVampyreLayer]

Originally posted by Koliedrus
It could be that I'm anxious to take advantage of the technology before someone comes along and tells me that it's illegal. One side has much more money than the other (where's Muffy?)

I never took intellectual property sorry.

[MAC]

Originally posted by MuffyTheVampyreLayer
I never took intellectual property sorry.

you take that back before I make a funny :D

I shoudl mention after all my spouting of opinions that copywrites do , infact say that you MAY NOT copy the material in any way shape or form. They were designed to have away to convict ppl who made a profit off someone elses products in a day when there was no way to police these things.

the point of most of th eppl who say its ok to file share is that it is wrong to sell some elses work, but it is in NO WAY wrong to share what you have found that you enjoy

.....it was track 6 on an album that had 1 top 40 song and 18 suck ass ones.....I have been dubbing music since I was 12 years old, my tapes led me to be in music and they opened the world of music up to alot of kids around me that no one else in my area plays. I used to put remakes on tape with original releases. I played good songs from unknown albums by suddenly popular bands or bands that where popular years ago. B-sides, studio mixes, inspirational shit by nobody bands. I gathered everything I found that appealed to me and I copied to preserve it..by any means necessary
Shit you take for granted now. Go to winMX and type in KMFDM.
Now back up to 1991 in rural east texas and look for them.

hello, artists....FREE ADVERTISING
seriously
in 1986 a cousin of mine got a CD player.
he had about 4 CD's
they were over $25 each in 1986
not many ppl had cd players and not many ppl needed to buy cd's

BUT

today EVERYONE has at least 1 cd player
and most ppl have dozens of cd's
many ppl have well over 100 cd's

now those ppl can have thousands of tracks... on their computers

its the next step, figure it out and become part of the market or starve

oddly enough, the problem here stems from every artist having self produced albums and super cool CGI graphics made possible by advanced computer programs.....the very things that "steal" their work

[Mudflap]

They fuck you at the drive-thru.

Don't bother championing the drive-thrus.

[Venus]

Originally posted by Escape Artist


If I could personally compensate the artists I considered worthy, I would. Even if it were the same exact system sans greedy middlemen, I'd pay the costs involved. Just don't expect me, as a fairly discriminate consumer, to hand my cash over to someone I detest with lofty dreams of the artist who actually did the work getting their slice of the pie. Might as well go outside and torch what cash I have, for all the good it does.

So what you're saying is that the people who put together the CDs, produce them, direct them whatever you wanna call it are all greedy middlemen that no one really needs? If no one needed them to do their work, they wouldn't be around. You detest people you don't know because the price they charge for their business. Ya know, I know absolutly nothing about how a CD is made. I don't know how much it costs to make the CD, pay the different people it takes to produce one, buy the stuido time or equipment that goes into it. But I'm sure that after all that is added up, it's not cheap. They're in a business to make a profit.



With that said, to my knowledge artists make more money from tours than they ever will with cd's and the associated royalties. If I ever get off my dead ass, I'll go see a concert or two and be a little more secure in what's done with my money.

And what about the high ticket prices? You only pay those because no one's creating software for you to copy your own ticket. Believe it or not, you have to pay a few middlemen everytime you go to a concert aswell. There's fees for using whatever stadium you're in, people needed to run lights and sound, security, stage managers to make sure everything's where it should be when it should be there, this list goes on. All those people have to be paid, or there's no show. So you'd rather pay $70 for seats to see Areosmith just so you can see the band rather than $20 for the CD that you can hear the same music...and you call it logic.

Truth be told, I'd ecstatically watch the current system be run into the ground - enterprising people will create an equitable system to replace it in time. Trying to force a market on a populace that neither wants or needs it is just bad economics, though.

If the population didn't want the market, it wouldn't be there. Music sells because people want to listen to it.

[Escape Artist]

So what you're saying is that the people who put together the CDs, produce them, direct them whatever you wanna call it are all greedy middlemen that no one really needs? If no one needed them to do their work, they wouldn't be around. You detest people you don't know because the price they charge for their business. Ya know, I know absolutly nothing about how a CD is made. I don't know how much it costs to make the CD, pay the different people it takes to produce one, buy the stuido time or equipment that goes into it. But I'm sure that after all that is added up, it's not cheap. They're in a business to make a profit.

I did some quick googling, here's one studio's rates:

Just $40/hr for 16 tracks, $50/hr for 24 tracks and NO HIDDEN COSTS! Free set-up time, use of all instruments, engineer, even mix automation; all included in the hourly rate. Your only added cost is for tape, which we sell or rent very reasonably, or bring your own tape, if you prefer. (We use Ampex (Quantegy) 456 grand master for all analog formats)

Tape Costs 30 min reels
16 track(1/2 inch) $60buy/$30 rent
24 track(1 inch) $90 buy/$45 rent
40 track(uses 1 reel each of 1" and 1/2" tape)
both tapes locked $150 buy/$75 rent

You can do the actual mastering of tracks and production yourself with fucking Cool Edit Pro - case in point, Metallica is doing just that for their new album, but with higher-end software and a dedicated computer. Frankly, these people do this all the time. They make a living from it. The cost for an album, TOPS, should only be about $5-10k before advertising, it seems. That's pro quality, all the bells and whistles, btw. Should be quite easy to recoup that cost and still make a big profit.

And what about the high ticket prices? You only pay those because no one's creating software for you to copy your own ticket. Believe it or not, you have to pay a few middlemen everytime you go to a concert aswell. There's fees for using whatever stadium you're in, people needed to run lights and sound, security, stage managers to make sure everything's where it should be when it should be there, this list goes on. All those people have to be paid, or there's no show. So you'd rather pay $70 for seats to see Areosmith just so you can see the band rather than $20 for the CD that you can hear the same music...and you call it logic.


Yup. Out of that $70, the band will get a much larger chunk than it would through a cd purchase. All those venue costs are for the most part necessary for a good show - a record company exec giggling over the 20 mil he just made while the artist gets maybe 10% of that isn't necessary, desirable or even in good taste. Why support people that rip off artists? You think piraters are bad, take a closer look into how the recording industry works.

If the population didn't want the market, it wouldn't be there. Music sells because people want to listen to it.

People are making waves, or we wouldn't even be discussing this, Venus. The record execs have had a virtual moratorium on cd prices since the early 80's, with minimal attempts to lower it. Technology has made it possible and probable for a pressed cd, liner, jewel case and whatever other bells and whistles to cost them maybe $2.50. Did ya know they typically blackmail stores like Best Buy that cut the prices below the profitable level to make sales? Their stance: You drop prices, you get no store displays, et al. Seems to me they don't want people thinking they can get a cd cheaper, or it'll become a trend. It's not about making good music, keeping the masses happy or otherwise. It's about maximum profit and "fuck the masses, we have clout in Congress! We'll beat them down with their own money."

The problem with technology is that it renders the old stuff as useless as a turtle on its back. The record companies have spent the better part of a century perfecting their business model, and MP3's are swiftly and effectively rendering it useless. Instead of embracing this technology, they're trying to subvert it to their own cause, thus restricting growth, intellect and innovation; spending exorbitant amounts of money bribing our lawmakers for stupid and ineffective laws, which further restrict any kind of growth; and absolutely refuse to do business in an equitable fashion. Microsoft got bitchslapped for the latter. No, the market is NOT willing. This is a battle being fought hand and tooth whenever corporate America and common user meet - fact is, computers and digital processing make a great deal of this shit unnecessary, costly to consumers and backwards looking on the part of record companies et al.

Rather than imagine a future with no music, imagine one where it is carefully meted out to you for maximum profits; where the companies through PR and lawmaking have convinced the populace that even in their own homes with their cd's, mp3's or whatnot that they MUST pay .25¢ each time they listen to a song, where the players and computers have restrictive software and logging systems to count and automatically bill you whenever you play a song...and the artists? They get the same royalties. No increase for them. No increase in profits for the studios, either - they usually rent out on hourly rates. Once that cd goes to market they get nada.

That's the kind of fucked up Orwellian shit we're getting into.

I don't want that future for me or my kids.

I don't want that destructive MINDSET being passed along or accepted as the norm. That it's ok to fuck over consumers and other businesses trying to make an honest living, because someone, somewhere just might benefit from it if they get lucky.

[Venus]

Well I just learned that a friend of mine is sending me 15 CDs, all of which are created with music he's downloaded off the internet. Does that make me a hypocrite?

EA, I'm not gonna argue this anymore. Just because something's overpriced, and/or someone's greedy, doesn't make copying copyrighted material legal.

[SatansLeftHand]

Originally posted by Venus
Just because something's overpriced, and/or someone's greedy, doesn't make copying copyrighted material legal. just so. likewise, something being illegal does not make it wrong.

[MAC]

Originally posted by SatansLeftHand
just so. likewise, something being illegal does not make it wrong.

as much as I hate "points" systems at forums...jed should get a cookie or sumthin for that.

[AcidzCraze]

I copy CD's, games and download music. If I had a chance, I'd copy DVD's too. I have no qualms about this because when I really like a band, I'm willing to support them by also buying their CD (and even then, sometimes I don't).

All too often downloading MP3's has actually prompted me to buy a CD. Unless I've heard a review for it, I'm very wary about buying music. Haven't you picked up a CD and only liked one song on it? What a waste. Take Beck for instance. He used to be into that funk-rock that I don't particuarlly like. However, by downloading songs from his newer album (which is more folky) I went out and bought the CD.

One of the key things that Kol keeps subtley hinting towards is that this is not a new thing. It's just using different tools. Everyone copied VHS -- Hell my parents did, but actors still made money. The entertainment business still boomed.

People copied tapes, and the music industry is still around. These artists don't <b>just</b> rely on CD's or DVD's to make them money. Before a movie hits the DVD stage it hits the theaters. "The Ring" made $15mil just in 3 days. If that doesn't keep food on the actor's tables, what does?

The Strokes' concert was sold out at 30 dollars a ticket, weeks before the actual date for them to preform. That's just in Austin! Do you think they are going fade into oblivion because I have 10 songs of theirs on my Hard drive that I downloaded?

In short, the point is, CD's and DVD's are a secondary means for making money. If they have the talent to survive, they will because this isn't something new.

Just look at Aero Smith and Star Wars.

(Edit: I just realized I haven't read the second page. If anything was repetive.. sorry. )