justify movie piracy

with music CD's not much work is really done. your artists, writers and producers make the music. then an artist will take care of the case. then it gets published where the workers will be paid salaries so they arent really effected by sales, although the bosses will get paid more for bulk. then into the shops where the same sort of thing happens.

so thats like a tenner a disc not shared between many people. then you can argue that the artist will do gigs and stuff where they will make more than enough money.


but for films theres hundreds of people involved and a £5 ticket has to stretch further than £10 cd for everyone to get a cut. plus all these people worked almost full-time.

then the films are like £15 to buy which still has to cover hundreds of people.



i guess my point is musicians are over-paid under-worked bar-stewards. but in films - apart from the main stars and directors, are the little people and unknown stars actually being ripped off?


sorry for thinking, ive been advised against it but i'm feeling wacky today

piracy is bad

i'm not very good at this justifying thing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheDave

i guess my point is musicians are over-paid under-worked bar-stewards. but in films - apart from the main stars and directors, are the little people and unknown stars actually being ripped off?

---

Not likely; little people and unknown stars don't get points-although it would not be beyond the pale for the "Stars" to ensure those caught in their orbits suffer the brunt, somehow.:huh:

http://images.somethingawful.com/mjo...2004/Faid2.jpg

sod 'em

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Mulder

sod 'em

---

Koooorecked!;)

Unknown stars aren't getting any less money over this.

The ones that say they do are the companies. However, they aren't losing money, they are merely making less profits. And there's no proof that any of those who own an illegal copy would have paid for a dvd. DVDs are almost as overpriced as cds.

Besides, if you look at a lot of movies, like LoTR or the Matrix, you'll find that they paid for themselves at the cinema, the dvd sales are pure profit.

One could argue that the fact that some people will have access to the movies without paying, might hurt sales, since that would eliminate the opportunity of exaggerated marketing. If people can see a movie for themselves, they don't have to believe the commercials.

But it can also be argued that this is a way to reach people that might not even have heard of the movie if it hadn't been for piracy. I'm not sure that I'd have been in possession of dvds featuring "Shaun of the Dead" or "Underworld", if I hadn't seen them beforehand, as they didn't sound all that great to me.

It's a lot of free PR, and if their product is good enough people will still buy the dvds to experience the better quality, and whatever else they'll be missing with a pirated copy.

I reckon they are probably losing sales, but they wouldn't if they didn't charge as much for their products as they do, and if they strove to make better products, products good enough for us to want to see them with the best quality possible.


Piracy, IMO, sometimes separates the wheat from the chaff, since it can help truly great artists spread their messages, while it counteracts the agendas of those who make inferior works with only money in mind, since it prevents them from lying about their work.

Matrix2

All the justification you need - it proved they are just having a laugh anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr JP Fugley

I like movies.

I don't like paying for things.

Justification complete.

That is all.

---

It is this type of economy of thought that really allows Mr Fugley plenty of freetime. Freetime during which he can download free stuff.