Interesting bit of news, Millenium films, The ones responsible for the expendables series are going after 10 million people globally who downloaded the film, Each having to pay upwards of $300 out of court or court hearings will take place.
Will be quite interesting to get peoples view on this :)
Source - http://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/millenium-films-goes-after-expendables-3-downloaders/
well... it's a pretty mediocre film from what i hear...
Honestly $300 is a lot better than what they would get in court, where for a single song you could be charged thousands of dollars.
If you don't want to get caught, then don't torrent it. you take that risk.
They shouldn't be able to do these mass sueings. It's pretty silly. You can't even defend yourself not to mention IP does not equal person.
Anyway only just heard of the movie and no they shouldn't get 3bn for it, that is absurd, that is probably 10-20x what they would get if each of those downloaded brought a disc. And I am Sceptical that so many people downloaded it, that is way more than game of thrones...
pretty sure this is illegal with dmca - first they need to ask for removal in 72 hours then they can sue
> If you don't want to get caught, then don't torrent it. you take that risk.
State the obvious.
The whole business model of the music industry, and their vain efforts to try and perpetuate it are mind-numbing.
Is it illegal or immoral to save a copy of the Mona Lisa to your HDD? No, of course not. Granted, there are people who will argue against this, but they have no ground to stand on. Art is not a commodity, and can not be sold as a commodity. The amount of mental gymnastics you must perform to get to this line of reasoning I can not fathom. Musicians and the like still retain the exclusive right to profit from their art.
I say keep an eye out on this. They wont be able to track down 10 million people easilly and no doubt will target VPNs. If they manage to take VPNs to court then this could become problematic. Already seeing VPNs leaving Australia due to new laws
Is it illegal or immoral to save a copy of the Mona Lisa to your HDD? No, of course not.
That's not the same as stealing a movie.
Art is not a commodity, and can not be sold as a commodity.
Yes, it can be. and Yes, it can be.
The amount of mental gymnastics you must perform to get to this line of reasoning I can not fathom. Musicians and the like still retain the exclusive right to profit from their art.
If you're saying that artists, such as musicians, the entire music industry, actors, and the movie industry shouldn't get paid for their work, you are very ignorant of the subject. Would you work for over a year, eight hours a day, for free? No, you would not.
Torrenting IS stealing, technically. You are getting the product without paying for it. You have no more right to get a movie or song for free than the other people that purchase it.
Now, myself, I do torrent, heavily. But I also purchase movies and games, and see things in the theater. But to think that you are entitled to free things, and that you shouldnt profit from art, is ridiculous.
If that was your point. If not, please disregard.
I agree with this. There seems to be something dodgy going on. I hope this type of "legal" action doesn't turn into some kind of revenue stream for the companies.
That it would be more profitable than their original line of business would be quite absurd. Is the world really becoming this crazy a place?
did you guys just call "the expendables 3" art? bwahahahaha!
just wanted to point out the absurd... I don't want to stop you guys from discussing the philosophy, legality and such of digital content distribution... please, carry on...
From what i read, the movie doesn't sell because it's big pile of shit. Not due to pirating. Millenium Films got very but hurt because nobody is interested in their movie. So they're trying to force money out of people by exploiting the piracy issue. This is just absurd and very american.
I torrented EXP3 and it would be a cold day in hell before I paid any money lol
Just hope those dodgy independent companies or the law-firms that collect these on commission (per IP), don't add your IP address fraudulently to make more money. Because hey why not, all they have is a list of IPs, possibly even timestamped, that they claim they got from the tracker or DHT, in reality they could write anything into that text document and how would you know.
And yes the legal system in america is screwed, really badly. And the country is going to hell, and I doubt it can be stopped, its because the system of government you have perpetuates electoral bribery (vote buying) and this in turn (a large state) perpetuates the necessity to pay the regulators protection money, which soon turns into outright legislation purchasing. So you will just end up with a super-left wing, high redistributionary, corporatocracy where only big businesses and monopolies are allowed.
Phantom lets be honest here you can't steal a movie, or a game, well you could if it was a physical disc. But otherwise no you can't, because stealing is when you take something from one person without their permission and they don't have it anymore, they cant use it. What we are talking about here is not theft, it is not covered by any laws pertaining to theft, why because it is not theft. It is 'copyright infringement'. Why is it copyright infringement and not theft, because you are making a copy in a manner that the state has decided is illegal. So please stop referring to copyright infringement as theft.
Now its debatable whether this copyright infringement is even hurting industries, and if it is how much. Its also worth noting that it isnt the content creators taking legal action, it is always the middle man, and it is interesting to note that they bassically never give the money that was so called 'stolen' back to the content creators, not even the proportion they would legally be obliged to should that have been a sale, which is what they are arguing.
Actually these middlemen who take such large cuts and leave the content creators with cents on the dollar to pay for their recording costs, their living costs, and everything else are actually deplorable. There is no reason why people should not be able to self-publish to every major digital distributor, or use a paid service that does that for them, and take like 90 cents on the dollar or something. But these large companies, they have such large marketshare and spend so much on lobying, they are trying lock everything down. Stop this from happening.
So I find it hypocritical when they turn around, and accuse other people of 'stealing from' the artists, or hurting the artists, etc..etc.. Especially when they use their media clout to glorify being a musician and whatnot, and lure so many people into an industry where thanks all the large fees everyone charges, and the money everyone skims off, most people go into debt!
No, Game of thrones, the guardians of the galaxy, the hobbit, etc..etc.. They all made there money for no reason whatsoever. Unfortunately expendables was soo good, that it actually lost money due to piracy. Yep completely true. Because expendables is special!
Can we sue them for making a terrible movie?
Phantom lets be honest here you can't steal a movie, or a game, well you could if it was a physical disc. But otherwise no you can't, because stealing is when you take something from one person without their permission and they don't have it anymore, they cant use it.
Copyright holders frequently refer to copyright infringement as theft. In copyright law, infringement does not refer to theft of physical objects that take away the owner's possession, but an instance where a person exercises one of the exclusive rights of the copyright holder without authorization.
You're viewing something for free, that is not free. Its the same as sneaking into a movie theater, or sneaking into a fair. You aren't stealing a physical ticket, but you are getting the product without payment, which is the same thing.
That's not the same as stealing a movie.
I really just can't make the connection. I've been thinking a lot about this and I realize the dilemma, but I just don't understand how sharing is seen as theft. I have heard the argument that this deprives profit before, but I feel this is weak. It could be used against the person who hosted the file to be downloaded, but theft does not fit this crime. You could say the host of the file is maliciously attempting to deprive the artist, but I don't buy that argument for the 10 million who only downloaded and did not host. You might be able to work in the argument that as seeds they are complicit in this attempt to deprive, but I don't really buy that either..I see it being exactly the same, though I do not know if the law does. Mainly, I do not know if a buyer of a painting is able to sell prints and make profit off of the painting he just bought.. You can't sell print copies of painting you do not own, just as you can not sell copies of music you do not own. However, paintings new and old are uploaded and downloaded without a blink of an eye.
edit: I suppose if you view it like a steam game, where you purchase the right to play and do not own, it makes sense That's just a bit repressive/draconian, no?
No they are two very different things, hence why it is not covered under laws pertaining to theft, but rather laws pertaining to property rights. Making a digital copy of something is very different from stealing a retail outlets CD for example. And I feel like you are ignoring the hypocracy of these middlemen and the harm they are inflicting on the artists themselves.
I'm not saying it's just; I'm just playing devils advocate here. I pirate shit all the time, lol. It's exactly that. When you buy the movie, either the DVD or a digital download, you are buying the RIGHT to use it. You buy it, you can view it.
That's the point of selling it.
Companies HAVE to go after these things, or they will lose their copyright over it.