Piracy is necessary and doesn't hurt revenues - Page 6

HarryT · 07-11-2014, 02:22 PM

Why are they being cheated? They're being paid.

Greg Anos · 07-11-2014, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

Why are they being cheated? They're being paid.

Why are they using geo-restrictions at all? They're being paid....

HarryT · 07-11-2014, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Why are they using geo-restrictions at all? They're being paid....

You'd have to ask them that: whether or not they choose to use region coding is entirely their choice. They're entirely free to produce a "Region 0" DVD which can be played on any player anywhere.

Region coding gives them the right to say "this DVD can only be sold by retailers in a given part of the world". What it doesn't do is give them any say in who can buy from those retailers. It's a free market, and anyone can buy from any retailer they wish.

GERGE · 07-11-2014, 02:35 PM

From a very hard point of view; anyone can try to buy from any retailer they wish, but retailers should not be able to sell to everyone.

There is almost always a way to claim damage and illegality in commercial law (which includes all things we talked about in this topic) and unfair competition is like the grandaddy of all those ways.

Think of this example: As a imaginary business owner, I could also claim that a store that sells imported DVDs from USA hurts my business in Istanbul and as long as the goverment doesn't impose some taxes and write laws to make my prices and late availability competitive, the store that sells the imported DVDs are commiting the offense of unfair competition. It might not even need to be a store, I could even sue a kid selling the DVD in our local eBay variant for unfair competition.

Keep this in mind and look at my second point:

Laws are national and their purpose is the create a balance between private persons and the community. So, protecting the local DVD business serves the common good.

So, thinking both those things, it becomes clear that there is a possibility to sue someone who sells the region locked DVD, but the important point is that does not mean you can sue the kid who bought the DVD.

Actually if I were a lawmaker, I would impose taxes on imported region restricted media to protect national businesses and prevent unfair competition.

EowynCarter · 07-11-2014, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

You'd have to ask them that: whether or not they choose to use region coding is entirely their choice. They're entirely free to produce a "Region 0" DVD which can be played on any player anywhere.

Region coding gives them the right to say "this DVD can only be sold by retailers in a given part of the world". What it doesn't do is give them any say in who can buy from those retailers. It's a free market, and anyone can buy from any retailer they wish.

The main reason is simple : the local channel / publishers / distributors want their part of the cake.

Rizla · 07-11-2014, 02:37 PM

Geo-restrictions are there partly in order for the retailer to charge the highest price possible in a particular market, where the highest price in another market is lower. Third-world costs and first-world prices. Who owns these companies, anyway?

Rizla · 07-11-2014, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jandrew

I never said anything at all about the "evil empire".

You used it in your post, which I quoted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jandrew

I merely call bullshit on rationalizing stealing from the "evil empire" because they're "evil" ... and all you have to say in response is: But they're evil ???

I agree. But I am also calling bullshit on demonizing 13 year-old Johhny next door downloading Game of Thrones while ignoring the behavior of corporations that dodge-tax to the tune of billions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jandrew

Personally, I choose to not do business with, nor steal from, companies or people I find objectionable or "evil".

Good luck with that. The choices are reducing.

Doonge · 07-11-2014, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HarryT

Why are they being cheated? They're being paid.

Why are you thinking you are not cheating as long as you are giving some amount of money?

HarryT · 07-11-2014, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rizla

Who owns these companies, anyway?

Their shareholders, same as any other company. All the "big six" publishers, and all the big film studios, are floated on the stock market, so anyone can buy their shares and be an owner. You can buy shares in Disney or Hachette or Amazon, and be an owner too.

HarryT · 07-11-2014, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doonge

Why are you thinking you are not cheating as long as you are giving some amount of money?

For the reason that I stated in post #78 above. The law allows them to control who can SELL their region-coded discs; it doesn't allow them to control who can BUY them. No law is being broken, or moral principle being violated.

Doonge · 07-11-2014, 02:58 PM

The "legal" aspect of it, nobody disputes it.

You can try again.

HarryT · 07-11-2014, 03:01 PM

I don't need to "try again". You asked why nobody is being cheated, and I've told you. That's the law. Whether or not you agree with it is entirely your affair, not mine

.

eschwartz · 07-11-2014, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rizla

I agree. But I am also calling bullshit on demonizing 13 year-old Johhny next door downloading Game of Thrones while ignoring the behavior of corporations that dodge-tax to the tune of billions.

Any discussion about people committing crimes that doesn't also mention Amazon dodging taxes constitutes "ignoring" their behavior?

I assure you, we are not ignoring it -- if for no other reason than the frequent mentions you give it.

But: That isn't the issue at hand.

Doonge · 07-11-2014, 03:29 PM

In my initial post, which you reacted to, I clearly stated I wasn't talking about legality, and I was making a point about cheating the intent of Region restriction.

Many posts from somebody who's nitpicking on the term "necessary" and fails to understand context followed just to repeat that what you do is "legal" (which nobody disputes or care about).

If you disregard the intent of the rights-holders (or are just ignorant about it, which is a fair assumption because we are all supposed to be to some degree), then you cannot assess anything about morality like you did, and you should not get butthurt by the word "cheating" because it will only lead to pointless conversations like we had. After all, legal cheating is not cheating, amirite?

I even stated, still in the initial post which you reacted to, that I didn't think that what you did was a bad thing to do, so you knew I had no problem with legality or morality: why bother with your rebuttal if it's to retreat without saying anything in the end?
You wanted to have my attention by talking to me directly, while I was talking generally (even if I was refering to your posts), then you contribute nothing to me. But hey, that's still legal, and that's not immoral right?

And what is a bit irksome is that you know what we are talking about, and you know what you are doing. The post #78 which you allude to is clearly disregarding the intent of the rights-holders and sticking to "litteral" law. You are writing lines and lines beating around the bush.

BelleZora · 07-11-2014, 03:41 PM

Just a comment on the thread itself, not on the subject of the thread: even when the discussion heats up and MR members resort to shouting at each other (so to speak), it is more endearing than disturbing. I avoid most other internet sites because participants suck all the hope for humanity from my soul.

Kudos to everyone who vigorously and passionately defends his/her position while trying to demolish other arguments and all while refraining from nastiness and personal attacks. (A short descent into shouting is oh so human, but not nasty).

Carry on.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Piracy Irony: Copyright firm fined after stealing music for anti-piracy ad.	spindlegirl	News	4	07-21-2012 06:41 AM
Anti-Piracy group wants to ban you from talking about piracy	Nate the great	News	39	06-06-2012 05:20 AM
IDPF Reports Wholesale US Ebook Revenues up 173%	Smashwords	News	3	04-03-2009 03:33 PM
PVI revenues drop - weakening e-paper orders!	Alexander Turcic	News	66	07-14-2008 04:05 PM
NY Times online division revenues are growing	Bob Russell	News	1	06-20-2006 05:26 AM

07-11-2014, 02:22 PM	#76
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,544 Karma: 93383099 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	Why are they being cheated? They're being paid.

07-11-2014, 02:35 PM	#79
GERGE Guru Posts: 733 Karma: 5797160 Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Istanbul Device: Kobo Libra	From a very hard point of view; anyone can try to buy from any retailer they wish, but retailers should not be able to sell to everyone. There is almost always a way to claim damage and illegality in commercial law (which includes all things we talked about in this topic) and unfair competition is like the grandaddy of all those ways. Think of this example: As a imaginary business owner, I could also claim that a store that sells imported DVDs from USA hurts my business in Istanbul and as long as the goverment doesn't impose some taxes and write laws to make my prices and late availability competitive, the store that sells the imported DVDs are commiting the offense of unfair competition. It might not even need to be a store, I could even sue a kid selling the DVD in our local eBay variant for unfair competition. Keep this in mind and look at my second point: Laws are national and their purpose is the create a balance between private persons and the community. So, protecting the local DVD business serves the common good. So, thinking both those things, it becomes clear that there is a possibility to sue someone who sells the region locked DVD, but the important point is that does not mean you can sue the kid who bought the DVD. Actually if I were a lawmaker, I would impose taxes on imported region restricted media to protect national businesses and prevent unfair competition.

07-11-2014, 02:37 PM	#81
Rizla Member Retired Posts: 3,183 Karma: 11721895 Join Date: Nov 2010 Device: Nook STR (rooted) & Sony T2	Geo-restrictions are there partly in order for the retailer to charge the highest price possible in a particular market, where the highest price in another market is lower. Third-world costs and first-world prices. Who owns these companies, anyway?

07-11-2014, 02:58 PM	#86
Doonge Connoisseur Posts: 80 Karma: 1184732 Join Date: Nov 2013 Device: Kobo Glo	The "legal" aspect of it, nobody disputes it. You can try again.

07-11-2014, 03:01 PM	#87
HarryT eBook Enthusiast Posts: 85,544 Karma: 93383099 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: UK Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6	I don't need to "try again". You asked why nobody is being cheated, and I've told you. That's the law. Whether or not you agree with it is entirely your affair, not mine .

07-11-2014, 03:29 PM	#89
Doonge Connoisseur Posts: 80 Karma: 1184732 Join Date: Nov 2013 Device: Kobo Glo	In my initial post, which you reacted to, I clearly stated I wasn't talking about legality, and I was making a point about cheating the intent of Region restriction. Many posts from somebody who's nitpicking on the term "necessary" and fails to understand context followed just to repeat that what you do is "legal" (which nobody disputes or care about). If you disregard the intent of the rights-holders (or are just ignorant about it, which is a fair assumption because we are all supposed to be to some degree), then you cannot assess anything about morality like you did, and you should not get butthurt by the word "cheating" because it will only lead to pointless conversations like we had. After all, legal cheating is not cheating, amirite? I even stated, still in the initial post which you reacted to, that I didn't think that what you did was a bad thing to do, so you knew I had no problem with legality or morality: why bother with your rebuttal if it's to retreat without saying anything in the end? You wanted to have my attention by talking to me directly, while I was talking generally (even if I was refering to your posts), then you contribute nothing to me. But hey, that's still legal, and that's not immoral right? And what is a bit irksome is that you know what we are talking about, and you know what you are doing. The post #78 which you allude to is clearly disregarding the intent of the rights-holders and sticking to "litteral" law. You are writing lines and lines beating around the bush.

07-11-2014, 03:41 PM	#90
BelleZora Wizard Posts: 1,442 Karma: 25151986 Join Date: May 2012 Location: Seattle, US Device: Kindle Paperwhite, Kobo Libra 2, Pocketbook Verse Pro Color	Just a comment on the thread itself, not on the subject of the thread: even when the discussion heats up and MR members resort to shouting at each other (so to speak), it is more endearing than disturbing. I avoid most other internet sites because participants suck all the hope for humanity from my soul. Kudos to everyone who vigorously and passionately defends his/her position while trying to demolish other arguments and all while refraining from nastiness and personal attacks. (A short descent into shouting is oh so human, but not nasty). Carry on.