The point stands that making content cheap and accessible (eg Netflix) won't defeat internet piracy, when something can be obtained immediately and for free.

Yeah my local cinemas went to $8.50 for adult tickets and $6.50 for kids. Awesome move by them. They charge through the roof for food and drinks, but they openly say they won't stop you bringing your own in. So pack the lollies from Woolies, grab a $1 frozen coke from HJs/Maccas, and you're looking at a movie with treats for less than $15.

It also helps that I have two friends working at the place, so get free tickets anyway :lol::lol::lol:

Yeah, nah.

I would rather wait for the blu ray release than watch a low bit rate cam source.

Fast and Furious 7 has already grossed over $400 million. Would dispel your dud theory that the poor movie companies need protecting.

At Southbank in Brisbane you get your ticket, large drink an popcorn combo for $15. Unreal value compared to other places.

Definitely related to meta data laws

One of the main reasons they were introduced. Terrorism was just to get you to agree to them.

...And if you think this is a Liberal or Labor thing then think again...

You're both guilty of this breach of civil liberty muppets

I just had a look at my local cinemas website, if I took my wife and kid to see FnF tomorrow in the middle of the day it would cost me just under $60 before going anywhere near the confection stand.

Rusty's strawman (as usual) example does nothing to dispel an already proven strategy to minimise media copyright infringement.

Edited by notorganic: 9/4/2015 12:10:37 AM

:lol:

Cheap at a cinema in Australia? lol.

Fast and furious 7 (which is by the way a terrible movie) has so far been illegally downloaded over 2.59 million times, despite only being in the cinemas for a few days. This dispels notors dud theory that content that is cheap and accessible (ie Netflix) will defeat internet piracy. Of course people don't really believe such nonsense these are just the silly things people think up to rationalise their illegal downloading and externalise blame onto content providers.

Let the fallout from MetaData and this Dallas film case begin!

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/hypocritical-film-and-tv-companies-have-been-ripping-off-consumers-for-years-says-labor-mp-ed-husic-20150408-1mgnry.html

Lol.

:lol:

Kinda fitting that it's about a citizen smuggling a product into a country where it was available but too expensive.

Great movie though.

I downloaded DBC just after moving into my current place and later found out our internet connection hadn't been set up at that stage, we'd been leaching off the previous tenants who hadn't cancelled their account yet. It'll be interesting to see whether or not they get a letter sent here.

I'm not sure what your point is. The music band today can do all of those things and still charge for individual songs or CD's. Not everyone who uses the music for their own entertainment buys band merchandise or goes to concerts, their consumption represents a loss for the content producers.

I can understand if you're a nobody band who's trying to get a foot in the door, electing to give away their music for free, because it will enable them to build exposure which may generate revenue streams, but if you're an established band then you have a legal and commercial right to charge for products you create. If you can't afford such products then perhaps you're better off not buying them rather than stealing.

Of course Netflix has been available in the US for a very long time but illegal downloads are still off the charts, so the notion that cheap (a relative term), accessible content is going to end piracy is false.

Thats what Walter White said: "there are so many layers involving this, Skyler."

Im not sure who the Nick Nailer (thank you for smoking) is of this whole scenario is, is it the pro-downloader or anti-downloader playing devil's advocate?

It's all related.

That is all

Lol. While the Metadata laws suck they have nothing to do with this case.

Top film.

So this is what you get when you let MetaData Laws through, well done Australia, you feel asleep on this one, and didn’t stand up for your Civil Rights and Privacy.

Not to be a conspiracy theorist - but this is a case of the big telcos wanting to take out the likes of iinet, dodo, tpg in order to monopolise the competition

Well, telstra should have been more thoughtful back in the day when they privatised to permit competition in the telecommunications industry

What next? Attack people who use skype instead of calling / use international telephone lines?

Having said that, with regards to this exercise, it could merely be an exercise in revenue gaining as the movie flopped in the box office, and they want to recoup earnings lost to those who actually did consume it in another form

Anyway Im all for the next step of entertainment consumption, where a show, movie or song is consumed as a serum by injecting it into your brain as a stimulus instead! * I think we already have things like that :-k

Some more interesting thoughts on the outcome;

- Will this affect Telstra/Optus in making it easier to go after their customers now?
- Will other media become the target of such campaigns? (music, e-books, software)

-PB

Except making comparisons between high class cars and downloading a $20 movie is just as asinine.

Think of it similar to music. A band today practically gives their music away for you to use for your own entertainment. You love it so much that you become a follower of them.

They come to your home town and you pay to see them live
They release merchandise and you pay to wear it
They release "bootleg" or "sample" copies of their CD's and you pay to download it
They release it on vinyl and you pay to hear it as it was naturally recorded
They cross-promote other bands and side projects that you may enjoy

Netflix has done a fantastic job in charging us not a lot for access to unlimited television. But it's not the movie or the TV show we are buying, it's the Netflix brand. Make the consumer love your company by giving away the content they needed to hook them in and they will be your bitch forever.

As for this story, there is so much Napster to this. Hopefully it just sees more ways of sharing files like music and movies without having to spend half your wage to consume it

Wtf lol?

"But Anny Slater, of Slaters Intellectual Property Lawyers, said the plaintiff would have picked iiNet ahead of Telstra as the "best chance" of success, possibly after studying the 2012 landmark case brought against the Perth-based telco by the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft. iiNet won that case, but among the documents exposed during the process were case notes that pointed to higher legal hurdles at Telstra and its omission from that legal action."

Like what?

-PB

Edited by paulbagzFC: 8/4/2015 06:37:47 AM

The judge is going to review the letters they send out before they're sent.


Basically they're going to prevent them from sending out threatening letters saying "pay us way more than we deserve or else we'll sue". The damages they are entitled to from one customer might even be the $25 they would have gotten from a DVD sale.

I feel deep waves of shame every time I sit down and I'm watching something on ABC4 that I remember seeing before.