GG Posted January 20, 2012 Share Posted January 20, 2012 I don't blame you ... and I'm not trying to defend the studio's blindly here. They bear a share of the blame for being too slow to adjust to the threat they're facing from the internet (not just piracy). Nor do I support SOPA as it's currently constructed. But the fact remains that piracy is NOT a harmless crime. It has ramifications far beyond taking a few pennies from the studio's coffers. It impacts the consumer as much as it impacts the artists. What the ignorati miss as always, is that the US consumer is subsidizing the global entertainment industry. You're also a bit off in the studios' inability to being too slow to adjust. They're far more in front of the issue than the beating the music industry took. When you step away from it, you realize how hard of a battle it is fighting against people's notion that intellectual property is public domain and they are entitled to use it at will. As for the ridiculous notion that this website can be taken down because somebody used an IP-protected avatar, that's a strawman if I've ever seen one. First, the use of the avatar may be used in a legal fair use manner, second, Scott is not hosting this forum to promote the exchange of copyrighted material, which is the target of SOPA & PIPA. Also, the new legislation carries the same provisions as the existing US laws on copyright. So, if there's an outcry on the new laws, it should be about US exceeding territorial boundaries, not the fact that it is silencing the Internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 Well, it looks like we have nothing to say but "Disagree". You say I have no idea what Im talking about. I see you as a pawn for the Studios since they sign your check. Only time will tell, but you've already agreed with the fact that the Studios blew it by not figuring out how to adjust. I do think that the artists should be able to profit from their product, and people shouldnt steal from them. I just think they would have an easier time doing so if it wasnt for the studios. I guess we're on opposite sides of the chicken/egg argument since I dont believe artists need studios and record labels nearly as much anymore. And that will soon be not at all. As a footnote, here are a couple of successful artists talking about how the MPAA and Large Studios screw the small studios and independent film makers. http://thechive.com/2011/03/22/trey-parker-and-matt-stone-discuss-why-the-mpaa-is-bulls-these-are-my-heroes-video/ That clip has nothing to do with what we're discussing. No one is talking about censorship. We're talking about piracy and how that impacts not only the artist, but the consumer. I am no fan of the MPAA. But I do make my living in IP. I make my living working within the studio system but not exclusively. I do indie stuff, I do web stuff, I do all sorts of different avenues so this isn't about me being a pawn for the studios. This is about me explaining to you that you don't understand half of what you're saying. You're using buzz words and concepts without understanding what's really behind them. Calling a studio the middle man is just wrong. They make a product. They are one of the only ones who can make this particular product (movies) because of the financial realities of the marketplace. Investing in movies is the surest way to lose your money. The first rule they teach you at Stark (grad school for producers at USC) is to NEVER invest your own money into a project. Why? Because art is subjective and you never know what's gonna hit and what's gonna miss. With the internet and the ease of digital piracy rising through the oughts, you saw a rapid decline in the number of indie movies made each year. Why? Because piracy has made the already slim profit margin even slimmer for anything that doesn't make 100 million dollars at the box office. And face it, not many movies are MEANT to make that much money at the box office. Piracy won't "free" filmmakers to produce more movies. It makes it HARDER. If you remove the studios, who right now are the only ones willing to invest millions of dollars into film and television, then you will see even LESS movies and TV shows. Explain to me how indie filmmakers will get more profits if the studios disappeared tomorrow. I'll wait. What the ignorati miss as always, is that the US consumer is subsidizing the global entertainment industry. You're also a bit off in the studios' inability to being too slow to adjust. They're far more in front of the issue than the beating the music industry took. When you step away from it, you realize how hard of a battle it is fighting against people's notion that intellectual property is public domain and they are entitled to use it at will. As for the ridiculous notion that this website can be taken down because somebody used an IP-protected avatar, that's a strawman if I've ever seen one. First, the use of the avatar may be used in a legal fair use manner, second, Scott is not hosting this forum to promote the exchange of copyrighted material, which is the target of SOPA & PIPA. Also, the new legislation carries the same provisions as the existing US laws on copyright. So, if there's an outcry on the new laws, it should be about US exceeding territorial boundaries, not the fact that it is silencing the Internet. The issue with SOPA is it doesn't treat the disease. It just treats the symptoms. The real problem is that no one in this town has figured out how to monetize the internet when it comes to TV and Film. The business model isn't evolving, it's being ripped up and thrown out every day. Yes, they've been ahead of where the music companies where but that's a low bar. The way things are going to end up working, and you're seeing this with Crackle, HBO On the Go etc, is the DVD market will disappear. It's already begun, but the studios right now are hell bent on keeping it alive for some inexplicable reason. They're trying new marketing and DVD release strategies but they will fail. In the end, there will be one copy of the movie, it will be owned by the Studio/Network/Producer/Filmmaker and kept on their server. It will then be available for upload to all mobile and home devices for a charge. That will make tracking piracy easier, it will limit the pirates' abilities to produce a quality product since they'll be unable to rip a DVD copy of the film, and it will give the consumer what they want which is entertainment WHEN they want it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted January 21, 2012 Share Posted January 21, 2012 isnt this the same argument that was made when the industry freaked out about VHS and cassette tapes? I just saw this article today.. http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/112878 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts