I'd provide the doughnuts, but you are a three day drive from me! Good idea setting up a separate e-mail from Vivid for him to send his next computer virus to (if he's steal and argue it isn't stealing, he'd send you a virus and say that is OK, too). I'd give my e-mail to send the incriminating info to, but I don't want my computer wrecked like my sister's was a few days ago (not by anyone to do with this site). I dare Zaer to send Howard his home address and copies of all files he has posted to Brazzers et. al. over the last six months, virus-free. I also dare him to send the same information to Mike South, Jim Gunn and Larry Flynt, also virus-free. Since Larry likely doesn't use a computer, you will have to send that e-mail to his legal department!
However, maybe we should get KillBill and have a mumbly committee about it in the "next deactivated member thread". Also, I require from here on out that every 3rd post in this thread has a nice picture of some young hotty in fishnet somethingorothers. That's right, every third goddamn post people!!! If there are not tits and ass and fishmouths... I don't think I can take too much more of this fucking thread lol. Edited by - seedfeeder on 3/27/2010 12:34:13 AM
[Link]
Zaer Deactivated User
249 Posts 10/07
Posted - Mar 27 2010 : 12:42AM
Ok then.Except of course that sharing copies of purchased content isn't theft. And to call such an act theft is rooted solely in opinion and beliefs as history has shown us. And if the industry never releases figures on it's profits or sales how do we know that shared content affects their profits one way or the other? Furthermore, if such an act was so deleterious to their profits they should be falling all over themselves to demonstrate openly exactly how much profit is allegedly lost. Yet they refuse to do so. Perhaps because they aren't significantly harmed by shared content and they know it.The court case you're referring to: Dowling v. United States was cited to state that the court held that sharing copyrighted content was not equivalent to theft. Which is common sense of course, but sometimes such matters need to be formerly spelled out. And most laws are created by the powerful to suit their own interests, that's not really up for debate.In the given example an actual physical object is taken from someone, fitting the definition of theft. With shared copied digital media there isn't any deprivation of physical property from the original owner. Edited by - Zaer on 3/27/2010 12:43:30 AM
[Link]
Zaer Deactivated User
249 Posts 10/07
Posted - Mar 27 2010 : 12:50AM
That would be a statement best suited for those engaging in vile name calling and threats of violence in this thread. Edited by - Zaer on 3/27/2010 12:50:38 AM
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Mar 27 2010 : 3:08AM
Are you kidding me? 1. Serious does not apply to porn. Just look at music, or sports. 2. The fact that it is going to happen disproves your entire argument. Almost like kinetic energy which you don't understand, but so what? 3. Those losses are built into the price, so the concept becomes irrelevant. 4. Fans and customers are ultimate buyers, even tho they may steal several times yearly. It's still good for the industry. 5. Billions are being made and the profit margins are higher than any industry on earth, so what's not to love? [/quote] No, you must be kidding me. You aren't that short sighted, are you? 1. it doesn't matter whether it is porn or music or mainstream movies, or video games, stealing is just as bad with porn as it is with anything else. That is a moronic argument. You are talking about peoples livelihoods. 2.I said it may happen, but that doesn't make it right. Try reading what was posted Mr. Science major. 3.The price goes up as the losses go up as with every industry. Is it ok then to go into a store and steal? Again moronic. 4.A fan is good for the industry, a customer, that is someone who PAYs for what they buy is good for the industry, but a thief is not good for any industry. 5.You are so wrong, it isn't even funny, you have not one clue what you are talking about. your whole statement #5, doesn't have one right word in it. When we sold new releases for $35 wholesale in the early 1980s that may have been slightly true. Today most studios but a very few, can't even get $10 wholesale for a new release. With all due respect, you are talking out of your ass.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Mar 27 2010 : 3:16AM
Still waiting for your email with your information. You say what you do is not theft, and according to you not against the law. So you should have no problem providing your personal information. Not a threat, no name calling. You should want to be a test case. To prove your point. They are called ILLEGAL downloads for a reason. because they are illegal. You say not true. I wonder what the FBI would say? I wonder also if ADT would do the right thing with all your posts and turn you over to the FBI. That would be funny, huh.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Mar 27 2010 : 3:18AM
Could you explain, by the same logic, why it is wrong to steal physical property? After all, aren't the laws around property created by the powerful to suit their own interests? Also, why do you defend lawyers, but then say that copyright law (created by lawyers) is just to serve the interests of the powerful (who employ lawyers)?
Maybe you should do that yourself, Woody. The FBI's phone number is (231) 456-5489. Their address is 330 Ionia Ave. NW, Grand Rapids, MI, 49503-2549 I am sure an agent would be happy to talk with you. I am sure they also have a Washington DC office if you feel that more appropriate.
This has gotten ridiculous. Who's right and who's wrong doesn't matter. Who can write within the bounds of forum etiquette does. Take a break, ya'll. Sheesh. Edited by - savoy on 3/27/2010 6:32:26 AM
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Mar 30 2010 : 1:44AM
I really do think who is right and who is wrong does matter. I don't think anyone should condone illegal downloading, especially ADT. I think this has been keep pretty civil in spite of some posters admitting to out right theft. In light of that, I think the people getting ripped off have been very gracious, considering. It would be nice to hear from someone from ADT about their views on what they consider who is right and who is wrong. Maybe explain why illegal downloading from your point of view is harmful to the industry. Maybe they would listen to you, we know they are not listening to the people it effects.
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Mar 30 2010 : 9:58AM
Zaer wrote:
Zaer Deactivated User
249 Posts 10/07
Posted - Mar 30 2010 : 11:02AM
Perhaps you should abide by your own rule and read what I wrote, because I wasn't referring to the ACTA, I was asking why the industry doesn't directly state how much of their profits are lost due to file sharing. Or for that matter state how much they make annually period. And I stated that they haven't done so is possibly due to the reality that they know they aren't significantly harmed by it. Furthermore, it is more than likely true that they know most of the downturn in the industry is primarily due to the recession. And when the economy improves their profits will do so as well. And it's odd that you would bring up the ACTA, given the heavy criticism its taken from civil liberties groups, and given that negotiations for it have taken place largely in secret and requests for information about it have been rebuffed or met with heavily redacted documents being sent to the document requesters.You should be more mindful of what you write as the majority opinion states: "interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft."This isn't a serious response. Most understand that many laws aren't created through a wise and rational process. But created as needed due to pressure from wealthy and powerful interests to further suit their own interest whether good for society or not. Hence the continually low approval ratings for lawmakers in virtually every election cycle. But I suppose anyone who holds the founding fathers up as people to be honored instead of understanding that they were supporters and promoters of slavery, racism, misogyny, the actual theft of Native American land, ethnic cleansing of Native Americans, and other assorted vile deeds wouldn't understand this. Edited by - Zaer on 3/30/2010 11:13:29 AM
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Mar 30 2010 : 1:42PM
I'll give you that one. My response was not to the refusal of the industry to publish accurate sales figures, a refusal I have, in this thread and elsewhere, said was a disservice to themselves. It was to your contention that downloading without compensation was not theft. I quoted the wrong bit of yours.Possibly? Theyve come to this very thread to say that they ARE harmed by it, pointed to industry insiders saying in print that they are harmed by it. Your choice to ignore them doesn't make them liars. Besides, even if they WEREN'T hurt by it, even if they somhow profited by it, downloading someone's erotica without paying IS STILL THEFT. Whether it costs them sales is not relevant.No doubt this is true. And? Your point here seems totally irrelevant to the question at hand.Whatever ACTA's problems are viz. a viz. its secrecy, etc. the relevance of it , as I stated, was that the industry IS actively trying to find and prosecute piracy. I said ".Although the focus of the story is on disclosure, please note WHAT they are talking about." In that post, as well was a quote from a representative of the MAINSTREAM media: We can't stay in business, we can't make more movies, if people are going to steal them all the time," More evidence for you to ignore that stealing in the form of unpaid downloads is a real problem, even for mainstream movies, which have NOT been adversely affected by the recession.And you should be mindful (not MORE mindful since you have yet to quote something in proper context) of trying to change the meaning of something by quoting only portions of text that by themselves say one thing, but, in the actual text they are taken from, mean something entirely different. I'm actually surprised you left in the word "easily" because it destroys what you are trying to say it means: "Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud." Copyright violation is a different form of theft. That was never argued. But it IS theft. Even Dowling acknowledged THAT. As I quoted above: "Dowling appealed all convictions BESIDES those of copyright infringement." As usual, you scrupulously avoid that this case was not about whether copyright infringement is theft. It was about whether taking media that isn't yours can be prosecuted under a law prohibiting the theft of merchandise accros+s state lines. Moreover, the law I cite above referring SPECIFICALLY to copyright infringement as a form of theft has has been used successfully to prosecute piracy several times and has never been overturned on appeal.This isn't a serious response. Most understand that many laws aren't created through a wise and rational process. But created as needed due to pressure from wealthy and powerful interests to further suit their own interest whether good for society or not.
Click to expand
You are personally acquainted with most people, are you? You KNOW that they "understand that many laws aren't created through a wise and rational process?" Still making it up as you go along.Where are you from? Not here in the U.S., that's for sure. Statistically since this nation began, the majority of incumbents who stood for re-election WERE re-elected.What happened toOk then
Click to expand
. ? Your argument from the beginning has been that downloading or watching porn that you don't pay for isn't stealing. The only authority or proof you have cited in support of your position has been your own insistence that it isn't theft because YOU say it isn't. But you know it is, and you already admitted that it is, when you started in about it not costing anybody money or the laws being corrupt. Your argument shifted from 'it isn't stealing' to 'it shouldn't be stealing because it does no harm' and to 'it isn't stealing because most laws are corrupt'. The latter arguments tacitly accept that it is stealing but that the theft is justified. The only consistency in your arguments is that you have not cited a single corroboration of your viewpoint. You have yet to indicate a source for any of your statements, because the only source for them is this strange need you have to come on here and justify theft . If you don't give up this viewpoint of yours, like you should, you'll come back on here and say that we haven't explained something that we've explained a dozen times, or you'll just repeat that it isn't theft or that the laws are corrupt or that stealing porn is good for the porn business or whatever. Why bother? Whatever comes next, you'll go on stealing porn untill it becomes too hard or too risky or you get too old to care, or they come and arrest you. And because you can't stand to look in the mirror and see a crook looking back at you, you'll keep your notion that you don't steal porn.
[Link]
Zaer Deactivated User
249 Posts 10/07
Posted - Mar 30 2010 : 3:35PM
They have as of yet offered no relevant proof to demonstrate that they are harmed more by file sharing or the economy. But based on the evidence I would consider the latter to be a more a significant issue than the former. Actually it is relevant whether file sharing costs them significantly, because if it doesn't then efforts to deal with it are a waste of effort and money. If it does, then such efforts are worthwhile. As for whether or not sharing purchased content is theft, that is entirely based in opinion, which has already been proven.Considering that profits are up among the entertainment industry, even in a recession, it demonstrates overwhelmingly that file sharing has never been and was never a serious issue for them. And studies have proven that the the record and movie industries have dramatically exaggerated alleged losses due to file sharing to justify their legislative agenda to increase their profits. And from the majority opinion: "interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The Copyright Act even employs a separate term of art to define one who misappropriates a copyright": If it doesn't easily equate to theft, then what does it equate to it? Not theft as it's not the appropriation of a physical object and it similarly doesn't deprive the copyright holder of the use of the content.The definition is highly subjective. Because what you define as theft is different from what the executive who said skipping commercials on a dvr is theft, defines as theft, or what the record industry, who once said that taping songs off the radio is theft, defines as theft. Or perhaps as you defined theft, namely that watching a video on a tube site is theft, which is so absurd that virtually no one would accept that as a proper definition of it. And that's the problem. It's based solely on opinions and beliefs. Nothing objective.And had you been paying closer attention you would know it never shifted. Fundamentally it was based on the opinion given that this is what this entire discussion is based on, opinions, that sharing purchased content isn't property appropriation. As for whether or not file sharing lowers industry profits, that's unknown as the industry doesn't release it's financial information, which is odd since if they were harmed by it you would think they would go out of their way to prove it. Perhaps they aren't harmed by it after all and they're just dealing with a slump due to the recession and they'd like to blame it on some other issue. Edited by - Zaer on 3/30/2010 3:41:46 PM
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Mar 30 2010 : 6:57PM
Zaer writes As for whether or not sharing purchased content is theft, that is entirely based in opinion, which has already been proven. Nothing has been proven. It has been proven that copying content is illegal, according to the FBI. Do you acknowledge this or not? It has been proven that uploading or downloading content to or from a share site is illegal, if it is copyrighted material, according to the FBI. Do you acknowledge this or not? The only thing that has been proven, that seems to be ok, is if you buy a copy of a movie and loan it to a friend. For profit or not it is illegal to copy dvds that are owned by a producer, who holds the copyright to the material. You have proved nothing other than that. You proved you don't like the laws. It doesn't matter how much money the industry is losing, that is completely irrelevant, what is relevant is that we are losing money due to piracy, torrent and tube sites.. You are saying we should show you how much we are losing, then you will make a determination as to if it is right or wrong to steal from us. Why should it matter how much we are losing? If we lose $1 dollar or a billion dollars, it is stealing. That is an absurd agrument. It is also absurd you think theft of a copyright work is a matter of opinion whether you have the right to just take it or not. You do not have that right.
Yeah yeah yeah, whats the point of all this endless boring talk? LOL, I see "woody" is still writing endless pages of text nobody cares to read anyways.Some things never change, lol, even If I havent logged in here for three months or so. People who wanna download something from the internet for free can not and I repeat cannot be convinced to do otherwise. Otherwise they wouldn't have done it in the first place. We all know stealing is bad.( I mean, I think its NOT a good thang if you are fortunate enough to be able to afford it like myself or others here) and loaning a movie to your friends is okay. But it is also a fact that lots of people in lets say africa or people in other third world countries just dont have the money to buy expensive porn movies of $35 of evil angel or whatever. I know for a fact that -just like with those "toy" laptops that are being made available for a slight amount of money in poor countries- internet connection (if available at all) is also very very cheap. So what are we gonna do about illegal downloading in those countries or what are we gonna say to them or more specifically what is "Woody" gonna say to these people when he would get a ticket from Vivid to go to some townships in Africa? Are you gonna deprive them of their sexual joy of watching some porn, deprive them of a potential enjoyable pastime? Are you gonna say, "dont download assholes, thats stealing....I would suggest that you all save your salaries so that you can buy 1 (one)! original Vivid movie after 2 or 3 years of saving or that they rather should hide behind a tree with one hand in their pants to watch some cows, giraffes or lions get it on and then bust a nu while they watch? C'mon now, guy, get real!!!! Somebody has clearly never been to Africa or Asia or poorer regions of Brazil, lol. I have literally seen hundreds of copied vivid and evil angel etc. titles in crappy "warehouses" or for sale on some porn stands on small local markets in favelas or wherever where the stench of rotten fish and poop etc is just unbearable. And you wanna go to those local markets as a representative of Vivid or you want the US government to go to the governments of those countries to say that they are not allowed to buy those new films for 5 cents or that said government should do something about the illegal pirating? LMFOA. The only thing you care about is getting a better paycheck due to more sales. You know, the porn business will never die, and this thanks to the 10's of millions of people who are able, who are fortunate enough to buy original dvds. There's lots of hypocrisy here too....some people here say the the worst of things about downloaders but download stuff themselves in such a manner that their internet providers probably are getting nuts, pffff. But hey, I guess thats just the way to go huh? Thats why I dont care about anyones opinion in this thread And dont care to read about SOME (not all) so-called honest people here. You know, I dont care, only God can judge y'all. In my case, I must have bought more than 200 original dvds. I have family & friends living in some Muslim countries that have very strict laws that can get you in lots of trouble when you import porn or let alone just have it in your possession. I have copied lots of dvd's of mine and send them anonymous to them encrypting them with the most difficult to break software available. Nobody is able to convince me that I cannot do this. Its just the way things must go. Basta! Thirdly, what about (older) movies that cant be purchased ANYWHERE not even second hand on online marketplaces???? I mean it's friggin' ridiculous. For the last 2 months or so Im looking to purchase dvd's of the spanish director duo, the Lapiedra bros. I just wanna look those movies on my 60 inch Plasma in the best quality available. Im looking for Spanish made, Argentinian made and Colombian made porno in general. I cant find SHIT! But, seriously, what are the first 25 results when you google for all of their movies?? Yes, download links for rapidshare or megaupload or whatever. I can imagine someone in my case but with a small television and without a big heart for the porn industry because of lack of money, would download those movies and would not think about it twice and just enjoy the slightly crappy quality of the downloaded material. Anyways, these are just some examples of movies of the spanish lapiedra bros. who also operate in Argentina and across South america. They are rather new 2008 or 09. I do not want any download links, as said, just like doing research for vivid movies, they're the first ones that you get while googling for titles. I'd like to have some weblinks where I can purchase the original movies. You can also send me a PM/or e-mail using by clicking the envelope next to my name. Thxs!!!! Edited by - adt44 on 4/1/2010 9:31:28 AM
[Link]
Ida Lupino Deactivated User
429 Posts 11/08
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 9:07AM
Downloading erotica is not theft, whether it is yours, or someone else owns it. All you have to do is minimal constitution law to see that copying any kind of artwork is perfectly legal. If this were not the case, anyone who ever drew a cartoon or comic strip would be in jail. The fact that the entertainment industry exaggerates losses just proves that the whole industry, including porn, is fair game for theft. Deal with it.
[Link]
Imaginative Deactivated User
158 Posts 5/05
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 11:35AM
A recent poll shows that people who download music illegally, also spend the most annually on music. These users attest that they have use the internet to explore different artists, genres, etc. This doesn't surprise me at all. I have a feeling that this may be true of porn downloaders as well. The reality is this: It has been over TEN years since the launch of Napster (feel old?). That means that both the porn industry and mainstream movie industry have had ten years to come up with ALTERNATE BUSINESS MODELS to counteract the inevitability that what happened to the music industry will happen to them!! And what did they come up with? Blu-ray? Yes, they came up with Blu-ray after the "music revolution" PROVED that consumers care more about convenience (i.e. downloading) over quality (i.e. MP3 vs. compact disc). In the end, we have seen that for the ARTISTS and music as an art, the internet turned out to be a good... no, make that a GREAT... thing. No longer are they held hostage by non-creative widget counters at record labels. For the first time in history, ARTISTS are free to find their own audience. And this is what scares "hollywood woody" and others like him. For years, pornographers have gotten filthy rich LITERALLY on the backs of the women who have been exploited by the same industry that NEEDS them in order to survive. (Let's see Hollywood Woody make a porn all by himself.) By rights, the Superstars (former and current) who have generated HUGE revenues for the porn industry should be the richest from the industry. People like Taylor Rain, Jenna Haze, etc. should be multi-millionaires based on the revenue they've generated. We know this is not the case. The only women who have made HUGE cash, are the ones who did it by going to the other side of the camera. Often, the women who have been so easily exploited by the industry are either damaged or perhaps not very savvy, and they have had no one to protect their rights. They don't even have HEALTH INSURANCE or a union! The Porn Industry isn't in trouble, no. The people on the SIDELINES in the porn industry--perhaps, people like Hollywood Woody, certainly like the executives at the music labels--are the ones in trouble. As for the actual TALENT behind the porn industry, the internet is the best thing that has ever happened to them--even if they don't know it yet. When all of the dust settles the WOMEN and the creative directors with vision will hold ALL of the cards... and all the cash. Not only is this a good thing... it's the RIGHT thing. And really, it's what the fans want.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 12:28PM
adt44 talk about writing endless pages of stuff no one wants to read, you win.
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 12:30PM
So if the FBI says something is illegal/unlawful that is the law of the land. How many people have been arrested, arraigned and prosecuted for owning, possessing or distributing supposedly "obscene" material in the USA alone (picture, film, video, magazine)? To this day law enforcement people pose as clients and have pornographic material sent to them in the mail in certain states where the "community standards" are not the same. In New York the same material would not raise an eyebrow, but in Florida or somewhere else, that is a no-no and you can go to jail. Why is the law not the same as everywhere across the US? Wny are not all people free to see the same thing all acrossd the USA? Why do some porn distrubutors do not wish to distribute some of their material in certain places of the country? How come I can see fisting and golden showers in a German movie, but I cannot see the same in a US DVD? Does the FBI control all sex content across the globe? The US wants to use its own internal legal yardstick for everything and enforce it in foreign countries as well? It tells Canada and other countries how to enforce their own (internal) laws? The FBI does not pass copyright laws, it only enforces them (based on complaints it received). Copyright laws do not take into account other legitimate issues. They are passed by old farts in Congress at the instigation not of the consumer by powerful entertainment lobby. The porn community has probably never spent a cent for such copyright laws. It has been handed down to you by other entainment media, whose vested interests are way bigger than yours. So they go to them and say: hey give us another 20-50 years to extend the copyright prescription, cause we did not make enough zillions from a movie we produced 52 years ago, and Congress pisses in its pants and says yeah we think that's fair enough. So we hear all the time that China is a big copyright and patent infringer and yet the USA (and most other countries) continue to buy and sell to them. You don't see the FBI heading down there asking the Chinese government to arrest people duplicating music and movie CD/DVD or filming movies off the screen (as a matter of fact I think China only allows approx 30 foreign films to be distributed theatrically in a given year). Sure once in a while a small outfit is "turned in" and a few hundreds/thousands of copies of CD/DVD are burned/thrashed but everything goes back to normal the following day. The FBI goes only where it is "welcomed" (or reluctantly telerated for political reasons)) and only at the prompting of the enterainment media. How far did Microsoft get when it tried to block computers (in the far East) that wre using pirated copies of their Windows operating system? Since you are so legally minded Woody, answer a question I posed some time back: what is the policy for the major/minor porn producers/distributors with regards to employees and talent they hire for their work? Does it run background criminal checks? Does it knowingly hire people who have criminal records? The company I worked for would not let us use the computers to download or access any sex material, and would do background criminal checks. You could not work for them otherwise. It had a certain strict work code of ethics that you had to sign off on. When you broke the code you were thrown out. Since you blow the horn for the FBI that much, would you want to see any one of them (or even many) with criminal records? Would that inspire you even more about them and the work they do? Mike South has said in this thread that Jules Jordan is in bed with web sites that basically post copyrighted material, so what are YOU or anyone in the porn industry doing anything about it? Why don't you or Mike pick up the phone and report him to the FBI? Why don't you take action against those tube sites, since you know who and where they are?
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 12:37PM
Yeah Woody, only YOUR posts are awe inspiring. ADT's post is a little too problematic for you to respond to?
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 12:40PM
You are dreaming. Let's talk mainstream Hollywood. The owners of the studios and producers make way more than the talent, always have, always will. No different in the porn industry. No one forced anyone to go into porn, so stop the "exploiting and on their backs" nonsense. Vivid has paid more money out to talent than any other company period. I for one, who you refer to as "on the sidelines", have been doing this for 26 years. They will always need someone to sell the product, be it to internet or dvd, so I am fine, thank you very much. What you advocate is basically having the inmates run the asylum, good idea.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 12:50PM
I never said my posts were awe inspiring, but i am not going to respond to someone talking about third world countries stealing porn, or whatever he was talking about. I at least speak the truth, it is very simple, stealing is stealing, except to those on here who feel stealing is ok. There is no convincing them what they do is wrong, so why bother. Justifications abound, but that is all they are. Believe it or not, it hurts everyone. That is the truth.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 1:10PM
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 1:13PM
Woody, ADT was just expressing some insights as to the availabilty (or unavailability) of porn product in some foreign countries, the local economy and social stigma of possessing/distributing porn, and to some extent why some of the people in these countries may have some "compelling" (but by US standards illegal) reasons for gaining access to porn. I don't believe ADT was making a case that such "access" was considered illegal in their own countries, but why certain people do certain things in certain places: economy, avaiability, religous/soxcial considerations, etc
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 1:28PM
Ok. But what does that have to do with people going on tube sites and stealing copyrighted material? How does that justify theft? It may not be illegal in their countries, but it is illegal in this country, where it is the origin of the stolen material. It is illegal for someone in this country to take any copyright work and share it. Someone in Africa or wherever would not be viewing this stuff if it wasn't illegally uploaded in the first place.
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 1:39PM
Woody every time I say something, you always come back with the immortal "what has this got to do with it"? So you will not answer the question as to whether your employer or porn community screens employees or talent it hires, for criminal records. The question is irrelevant to you, because it has nothing to do with illegal downloading, pirating and stealing DVD's? Everyone else has to be honest out there (that's what you have been saying), but not the one that produce or work for the porn industry? What image does it wish to project? You have the laws that you have and that you wish to use to protect YOUR product (copyright, copyright infringement, etc) because OTHER people invested the time and money for it. I do not recall the porn industry doing much in this regard. You just piggy back on the efforts and expenses incurred by others. Simple enough? Do you squirm when Max Hardcore is charged, convicted and jailed for producing "obscene" porn? Do you grieve professionally for his situation? Do you/your employer provide moral/financial support (legal defense, etc) for such cases? If not, why not? If not, you simply dislike the indivudal, or do you not wish to stand up for his/her right to make the kind of porn he wants to make? Is what the FBI doing in such "entrapment" cases fair, or even on its face legal? Copyright cases are quite easy for you to understand, but not "obscenity" cases? But they do effect the livelyhood of all porn producers, don't they, or do you pick and choose what you like, don't like, what you will support, and what you consider legal/illegal? I have yet to see, unless I missed one of your posts, why you think extension of copyright presciption is a valid argument by the entertainment industry in 2010. How many ***ing years does it need to turn a reasonable profit on a movie/song? If a lesser time was established years ago when movie distribution was even more limited, what justification in this electronic age is there for endless/longer period (because someone lives on an average 10 years more)? Edited by - Len801 on 4/1/2010 1:44:14 PM
[Link]
Imaginative Deactivated User
158 Posts 5/05
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 1:53PM
Yes, Woody. Let's break this down. I am employed by the mainstream movie industry, so I know a thing or two. You say, "The owners of the studios and producers make way more than the talent, always have, always will." But top Hollywood talent earns over $10,000,000 a picture, on the hopes that the movie will earn $100m at the box office. That's 10%+ of the gross, not including points. When was the last time a Porn Starlet got 10% of the gross, plus points? You say, "No one forced anyone to go into porn, so stop the 'exploiting and on their backs' nonsense." No one forces anyone to go into any occupation, but does that mean that they shouldn't get paid a fair wage? In any other industry, the more you generate for a company, the more you are valued and the more you get paid. But in porn, the scene rate generally doesn't fluctuate more than a few hundred dollars! And yes, no one forced them... but countless women (and like I said, many naive or mentally damaged), have been coerced. In real life, if someone hired a mentally challenged person to be a janitor and paid them with Skittles, they would be breaking labor laws. You say, "Vivid has paid more money out to talent than any other company period." And this is true, but again... there is not really much competition for you in that arena. You say, "I for one, who you refer to as "on the sidelines", have been doing this for 26 years. They will always need someone to sell the product, be it to internet or dvd, so I am fine, thank you very much." Yes, and as a person on the sidelines, you have suddenly found yourself obsolete. When there are NO packaged goods, and Starlets are creating their own content and distributing it themselves online, they will not "need" YOU or anyone to sell their product. Many smart women have already realized this, to amazing profits. Many more will follow. You are a dinosaur, and you have contributed nothing to the industry. (By the way, at the launch of DVD, I was employed by an authoring house who produced 100% of Vivid's DVD releases, so I know a thing or two about how they conduct their business.) And lastly, you say, "What you advocate is basically having the inmates run the asylum, good idea." And I love you for saying this, because it really sums up the deep-seated resentment you have against the talent that you have exploited. Yes, you'll reply, "It's just a saying..." but you chose to quote the saying! Yes, they are your inmates, aren't they? And you live in fear of them being discharged. Edited by - imaginative on 4/1/2010 1:59:17 PM
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 1:57PM
ADT can speak for himself, but I don't think in reading his post, that he was trying to justify stealing. I believe he was just giving a picture of the high cost of the product in certain countries, a person's small income, the availability of the product in a legal/social setting. Just because the product you speak of was produced in the US, that does not mean every country has to abide the same laws that the US has eneacted for ITS own citizens. Some of these countries have their own laws (gee what a thought!), and some may even not be democratic countries at all, who not wish to respect any laws enacted by foreign powers. So if they tell the USA to go blow it out their ears (as China and others have frequently indicated) that's exactly what they do, whether you like it or not. You want to better control your product and make it more affordable? Pay talent the same wages as every average worker ($30-35 an hour, OK by you?). Release the DVD under two hours using DVD-R, place them in a small paper CD envelope (no label/screen printing or anything), and sell them directly to the public (without any middleman) for rock bottom prices. Hardly anyone will then be interested in spending time and same amount of money to download or buy off a pirated copy. Revolutionary enough for you? You get to keep all the profits made and not share it with others. People will be happy because they can finally afford to buy a porn DVD. Very few people will want to download it illegally.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 2:50PM
Len this thread is about stealing porn. I will be glad to answer your question. Vivids employees have been with Vivid, all of them on the average of 10 to 25 years. They rarely hire anyone new. If they do hire someone new they do a background check. As far as talent is concerned, they do very intense background checks. I cannot speak for the rest of the industry. We pay for our copyrights, who cares who invented the copyrights, they are there to protect ALL. Fair enough. Even the Hells Angels has a copyright on their Death Head logo, so what if someone else before them established the law, you wouldn't dream of using it. As for Max, When Vivid got busted he did not come to our defense, he did not donate one thin dime to us. He knew what he was doing. I do not take pleasure in anyone going to jail. I must state again, no of this has to do with stealing porn, but I will answer you anyhow. Way before Max ever came along, Vivid was stung by the FBI for shipping product to where we were not supposed to ship. Did I think it was fair? No. But that was the law. We went to court, paid our fines and went on. That is their job. Again one thing has nothing to do with the other. I did not write the law as to how long a copyright is good for. But if it is for 50 years, it is 50 years, because you don't agree with it doesn't give you the right to violate it.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 3:12PM
I highly doubt the talent would take a pay cut like that number one. This is the USA, we like using distributors because we really couldn't handle filling orders for the amount of people who buy porn. So you say cut out the distributors, cut out the retailers, make stuff in a plain brown envelope, and sell it cheap. Why doesn't Ford just make one cheap car, in black? I don't think that idea is very revolutionary at all. I think it is not a good way to do business.
My final response to this thread. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rarely, unless it was Jenna Jameson. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [/quote] And we all know that she got successful and rich on the other side of the camera. Jenna was gamebreaker in this regard, and even with the help of her vision and her high intellect, even SHE will tell you how challenging that was. Ask her about it sometime. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am not aware of any porn company hiring mentally disabled talent. I don't think naive fails under any law. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Disabled" is your word. I used the word, "damaged." And while it may not fall under any law as you define it, you may find one day that karma is a bitch. Interesting how you chose to ignore my part about coercion. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That day is no where near on the horizon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, if what you say is true, and the end of packaged goods is "no where near the horizon," then you're obviously doing pretty well and piracy shouldn't be an issue for you. But again, I'm on the inside, and know the horizon is closer than you care to admit. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wow dude, that is harsh, I'm only 55. I think in your opinion I have contributed nothing to the industry, but that is far from the truth. I will not begin to list my credits here, but if you knew anything about what you are saying, and you can ask around, you are so far off base, it IS funny. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You're right here. I know nothing about you or your contributions. Apologies on the "contributions" part, but the dinosaur part wasn't meant as a personal attack, but unless you come up with some innovative new business models, you'll find yourself obsolete before you know it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have no resentment to any talent, as a matter of fact I am really good friends with most of them. I worked for talent, like jenna, who I love, and never was resentful of her being in charge. I made her lots of money, as she did me. I continue to do so. You don't know me, and you really don't know what you are talking about, for someone who claims to" know a thing or two". You have proven with your post, you are pontificating beyond belief. Do some research and then make some intelligent statements. You really look foolish with what you have written so far. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- But who needs who more? Talent can sell porn everyday and anyday, but can you sell porn without talent? I'm looking forward to the day where the majority of my porn spending goes to the people who deserve it. Edited by - imaginative on 4/1/2010 3:34:21 PM
Maintaining the pay rates for talent, the rest of the plan is still genius. The Ford comparison doesn't work. People need to touch, see, and feel a car before they spend tens of thousands of dollars on something they're gonna be paying for and living with for many years. A porn DVD is all but disposable, people buy on an impulse based solely on some small pictures on a boxcover, and it is a gamble every time. It needs to be cheap. Based on the gamble aspect of porn, a DVD should be cheaper than music, which you have opportunities to listen to before you buy. But that's another story.
I'm really tired of that argument myself Woody. Companies have a right to demand a certain price for whatever they produce period. Companies that make what they believe is high-end product, certainly have a right to demand or expect a high price for it. The internet is a great and "legal" equalizer though. There are plenty of legit retailers that offer a good or slight discount on new or newer films, and especially on older film. And there is always the option of legit downloading or renting to those who need to cut costs or don't trust the quality of the product. And there is always the option to wait until the price drops to a more affordable price. If you can't do any of that, then you simply aren't meant to ever have or see it.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 4:45PM
And we all know that she got successful and rich on the other side of the camera. Jenna was gamebreaker in this regard, and even with the help of her vision and her high intellect, even SHE will tell you how challenging that was. Ask her about it sometime.
I talked to her yesterday, it was no more challenging for her than for Steven Hirsch. She sold everything to Playboy and made a hefty some of money. If it wasn't for me, her company would not been what it was worth. I sold those pieces for her, I built up the brand with her. I hooked her up with Vivid in the first place, and Doc Johnson for her toy line. So I was there every step of the way. I still get her personal appearences, and she will be the first one to tell how hard I worked, and how grateful she is for that. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am not aware of any porn company hiring mentally disabled talent. I don't think naive fails under any law. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Disabled" is your word. I used the word, "damaged." And while it may not fall under any law as you define it, you may find one day that karma is a bitch. Interesting how you chose to ignore my part about coercion.
Nobody was coerced by Vivid into anything. I believe in karma very much so, I haven't had my Karma harmed in any way shape or form. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That day is no where near on the horizon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, if what you say is true, and the end of packaged goods is "no where near the horizon," then you're obviously doing pretty well and piracy shouldn't be an issue for you. But again, I'm on the inside, and know the horizon is closer than you care to admit.
Companies are allowed to do well without condoning being ripped off. DVD has still another 5 good years to go if not more. If you are on the inside why don't you just say who you are, like I have done, instead of hiding behind a computer? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wow dude, that is harsh, I'm only 55. I think in your opinion I have contributed nothing to the industry, but that is far from the truth. I will not begin to list my credits here, but if you knew anything about what you are saying, and you can ask around, you are so far off base, it IS funny. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You're right here. I know nothing about you or your contributions. Apologies on the "contributions" part, but the dinosaur part wasn't meant as a personal attack, but unless you come up with some innovative new business models, you'll find yourself obsolete before you know it. We are always coming up with new ways to do business. Vivid or any other viable Adult company will thrive. We haven't been blind to the tide of change. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have no resentment to any talent, as a matter of fact I am really good friends with most of them. I worked for talent, like jenna, who I love, and never was resentful of her being in charge. I made her lots of money, as she did me. I continue to do so. You don't know me, and you really don't know what you are talking about, for someone who claims to" know a thing or two". You have proven with your post, you are pontificating beyond belief. Do some research and then make some intelligent statements. You really look foolish with what you have written so far. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- But who needs who more? Talent can sell porn everyday and anyday, but can you sell porn without talent? I'm looking forward to the day where the majority of my porn spending goes to the people who deserve it.
The talent cannot sell the porn. It is very hard to blow your own horn, so to speak. Bruce Springsteen doesn't sell his CDs, he makes them, Sandra Bullock doesn't sell her movies, she stars in them. Same with adult talent. Relationships with studios and distributors goes much deeper than you may think. Plenty of porn stars, good ones, have started their own lines, most have failed. They don't know the business of producing and selling. Some have made it. There is a large cost involved into making a good porn movie, most talent couldn't cover that cost, plus advertising, replication, printing, warehousing, shipping, phone and light bills, let alone contact all the dist. and invoicing and collecting. It isn't as easy as you may think. Talent need us as much as we need the talent. it is a two way street. We treat all our talent exceptionally well. Unlike some other companies. We do not own our talents name, we do not take a cut of outside money they earn, etc., as some companies do. We have a great relationship with our talent. That is the best we can do, we look out for them. Sorry this is your last response. Edited by - imaginative on 4/1/2010 3:34:21 PM
Click to expand
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 4:52PM
That distinction is quite flagrant when you compare mainstream movies and music. Many if not most movies have been seen at some point or other on TV. If you wish to spend $25-$30 on a DVD to own and for your movie library you have a pretty good idea of what you are buying. And usually there are tons of movie reviews to check out before you buy. The same thing for music. We pretty much hear (whether in total or in snippets) music from radio stations (AM, FM, satellite,music videos) so we know what we like and what we don't like and we can either buy the CD or legitimately download the song/songs before we commit our hard earned money. Porn is another beast. It is not easy to buy off the shelf. Some video stores have an adult section (I'll get to that in a moment), but that is reserved strictly for rentals. Yes some have a bin where they sell off old movies they want to dump (they are old, scratched and/or nobody has rented them for weeks/months/years), but again they are pricey as it is. I have never seen them go for under $10. It is next to impossible to legitimately see a sizeable chunk of any porn movie before you decide to buy. Some companies/sites have brief trailers of some mvies but that is all you get. So how do I commit to spending $30 or more on something I can only see a box cover of with a few small thumbnails which tell me nothing. Have you seen some foreign box covers (the reverse side is all censored, like VMD, etc). I can't even tell whether condoms are used or not, let alone what scenes might interest meor not! Which brings me back to video stores. I can go back to the 1980's, and 1990's when video stores were just about in every corner. They had a large adult section (sometimes occupying 30% and more of the store space). They were getting dozens of new adult releases per week. Many of those have shut down, the few that are left have a tiny adult section (no larger than a walk-in closet). Many of them don't even put up 2-5 releases per month now. The owners complain that while customers are asking for say Evil Angel titles, the owner can't afford them because they are higher priced. They don't stock on plot-themes titles, because consumers want gonzo. It's a Catch 22. Customers are not renting because they don't see good new product on the shelves. The owner buys crappy 3rd-rate stuff just for the sake of saying he has an adult section, but is not making much money from porn titles. The same week that mainstream titles are released a geek down the block has rented one copy and has run off duplicates and selling them for $5. How are you going to compete with that? I am not even talking about downloading. A number of companies offer downloading of porn movies, but sometimes they don't tell you the running time, and the download price is just as expensive as the actual physical DVD. Perhaps for a hard to find or OOP title but for the rest why bother? Why does the idea of cheap affordable porn not really interest the porn community? The music industry has done it. They don't have to manufacture a physical CD to make money. You can go to iTune or other service and download one or several songs from different artists. Not quite the same for porn. You have to plunk down money before you have any idea of what you are spending your money on. I cannot see porn continuing with physical DVD for much longer. It's not a formula that is working. The porn industry better find ways quick to get the product to its consumers at an affordable price. If an illegal downloader has turned to the dark side, it is because you are unable and unwilling to satisfy that person. That person (as the music industry has learned) is a consumer nonetheless and if you give him what he wants at a reasonable price, and when he has a clear of the content of that product and how easy it is to get at it, he may be more than willing to acquire it legitimately. Edited by - Len801 on 4/1/2010 4:57:39 PM
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 5:10PM
Talent in the mainstream movie buiness wants to get paid, and paid well, whether the movie they star in is a money maker or a dud. They rarely invest in some capcity in the movies they make/star in. Essentially the are "economic" cowards. They would rather have someone else take the risks. When they star in a dud, it is never their own fault, it was the director, the script, etc. I can't recall the last time an actor or actress was honest enough to say : "I took on this role because I needed/wanted the money. I knew from day one that it would be a stinker. I am ashamed for my fans and those that have supported me in the past. I will never do that again. I care about the movie bsuiness, and my fans and to have them spend money on such a useless endeavor was duishonest of me." The few rare times that an actor has plunked down of his own personal money inmaking an independent movie, it has not worked well for him/her, and those leasons are quickly learned by any rising talent. Let someone else spend the money. I show upo on time, recite my lines and get paid at the end of the week. That is why for many years the talent was clamoring to share in video revenue but the studios wanted to keep that for themselves to pay off for the numerous flops they had to write off. I suppose the porn business is not that much different. Many women have tried to distribute their own stuff over the web. Some have been more or less successful and some others have fallen on their faces. Again you are asking a consumer to plunk down say $30 a month to see a certain limited and unkinown content featuring ONE person (alone or with others).
[Link]
Imaginative Deactivated User
158 Posts 5/05
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 5:21PM
Alright, you dragged me back in. Just a couple of things. :-) I won't reveal myself because I am in mainstream. You've built a business on anonymity, so I'm sure you understand. As much as I wish there wasn't a stigma against porn consumers, there is and always will be. Secondly, you contradict yourself. First you say, "it was no more challenging for her than for Steven Hirsch," and then you say, "The talent cannot sell the porn. It is very hard to blow your own horn, so to speak." Again, I think you are still basing your opinions on the physical distribution of packaged goods, which is going away. (I find your estimation of five years to be optimistic, at best.) The ground is very fertile for a new wave a Danni Ashe-esque entrepreneurs. People are quickly learning that while content can live on their computer, they can easily enjoy DVD quality content on their 60" screens while sitting (or laying) on their sofa. It cost me $20, plus equipment I already owned to set this up. Add to this the fact that connections are getting faster every day. I have a closet full of legitimate porn DVDs, which I almost never touch, because the content sitting on my computer is MORE CONVENIENT. I can browse through 1000's of scenes with my remote control from the comfort of my sofa. Already, I can preview a 2-disc DVD set and wait less than 1/2 hour to begin watching the content on my TV. (I have also been a premium member of X-Rent since they opened shop, and will still buy a DVD if 4 out of 5 scenes are worth repeat viewing, but how rare is that?) Yes, relationships with studios, distributors and brick-and-mortar run deep. But even you know, the internet has the power to cut all three parties out of the equation. Don't worry though. I would never steal a Vivid DVD. It's not worth my time. I have different tastes in porn than my Grand Ma. But you are smart to have cornered the market on the least technically savvy demographic. But what do I know? :-) Edited by - imaginative on 4/1/2010 5:38:16 PM
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 5:39PM
[/quote]Maintaining the pay rates for talent, the rest of the plan is still genius. The Ford comparison doesn't work. People need to touch, see, and feel a car before they spend tens of thousands of dollars on something they're gonna be paying for and living with for many years. A porn DVD is all but disposable, people buy on an impulse based solely on some small pictures on a boxcover, and it is a gamble every time. It needs to be cheap. Based on the gamble aspect of porn, a DVD should be cheaper than music, which you have opportunities to listen to before you buy. But that's another story. [/quote] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- People are tactile buyers in all aspects of buying anything, porn is no different. I think impulse buying of porn nowadays is a very small market, the buyers are savvy, they know the stars, directors and studios. Sunshine for instance is more of an impulse item, it is very cheap and usually poorly made. It could go in a plain wrapper. The average price right for a new DVD is anywhere from $15.95 to $29.95, check adt price market, you will see that is the case. That is cheap. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That distinction is quite flagrant when you compare mainstream movies and music. Many if not most movies have been seen at some point or other on TV. If you wish to spend $25-$30 on a DVD to own and for your movie library you have a pretty good idea of what you are buying. And usually there are tons of movie reviews to check out before you buy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mainstream movies are even cheaper, as they have had a box office revenue to pad there bottomline. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The same thing for music. We pretty much hear (whether in total or in snippets) music from radio stations (AM, FM, satellite,music videos) so we know what we like and what we don't like and we can either buy the CD or legitimately download the song/songs before we commit our hard earned money. Porn is another beast. It is not easy to buy off the shelf. Some video stores have an adult section (I'll get to that in a moment), but that is reserved strictly for rentals. Yes some have a bin where they sell off old movies they want to dump (they are old, scratched and/or nobody has rented them for weeks/months/years), but again they are pricey as it is. I have never seen them go for under $10. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I think the new porn buyer is smart, he reads reviews, he sees trailers, he knows he likes Evil Angel or Digital Playground, that is what he buys. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is next to impossible to legitimately see a sizeable chunk of any porn movie before you decide to buy. Some companies/sites have brief trailers of some mvies but that is all you get. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Most companies are VOD, some pay per minute. So I think that statement isn't really true. You can see them before you buy them. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So how do I commit to spending $30 or more on something I can only see a box cover of with a few small thumbnails which tell me nothing. Have you seen some foreign box covers (the reverse side is all censored, like VMD, etc). I can't even tell whether condoms are used or not, let alone what scenes might interest meor not! Which brings me back to video stores. I can go back to the 1980's, and 1990's when video stores were just about in every corner. They had a large adult section (sometimes occupying 30% and more of the store space). They were getting dozens of new adult releases per week. Many of those have shut down, the few that are left have a tiny adult section (no larger than a walk-in closet). Many of them don't even put up 2-5 releases per month now. The owners complain that while customers are asking for say Evil Angel titles, the owner can't afford them because they are higher priced. They don't stock on plot-themes titles, because consumers want gonzo. It's a Catch 22. Customers are not renting because they don't see good new product on the shelves. The owner buys crappy 3rd-rate stuff just for the sake of saying he has an adult section, but is not making much money from porn titles. Thus the feeding of the internet and the demise of porn in stores. I do have to say there are many chains that still stock new releases, such as Castle mega store, Romantix, Fascinations, and plenty more, Family video and Movie Galley, even Frys electronics. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The same week that mainstream titles are released a geek down the block has rented one copy and has run off duplicates and selling them for $5. How are you going to compete with that? Most mainstream companies have a non copy on them, harder to do now than ever before, as well as porn companies. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am not even talking about downloading. A number of companies offer downloading of porn movies, but sometimes they don't tell you the running time, and the download price is just as expensive as the actual physical DVD. Perhaps for a hard to find or OOP title but for the rest why bother? Why does the idea of cheap affordable porn not really interest the porn community? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There has been cheap affordable porn since the late 1980s, it is just not that good. But people buy it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The music industry has done it. They don't have to manufacture a physical CD to make money. You can go to iTune or other service and download one or several songs from different artists. Not quite the same for porn. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Again VOD, PPM, is there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You have to plunk down money before you have any idea of what you are spending your money on. I cannot see porn continuing with physical DVD for much longer. It's not a formula that is working. The porn industry better find ways quick to get the product to its consumers at an affordable price. If an illegal downloader has turned to the dark side, it is because you are unable and unwilling to satisfy that person. You are making another justification for stealing, not that that hasn't been done here a 100 times, it just doesn't make it right. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That person (as the music industry has learned) is a consumer nonetheless and if you give him what he wants at a reasonable price, and when he has a clear of the content of that product and how easy it is to get at it, he may be more than willing to acquire it legitimately. Edited by - Len801 on 4/1/2010 4:57:39 PM [/quote]
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 5:47PM
Talent in the mainstream movie buiness wants to get paid, and paid well, whether the movie they star in is a money maker or a dud. They rarely invest in some capcity in the movies they make/star in. Not true at all, a lot of them produce their movies, mel Gibson for instance. Sandra Bullock took a huge pay cut to do the Blindside, with a back end deal, if the movie tanked she would have lost $15 mil, but since it did well, she made more than her regular fee. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Essentially the are "economic" cowards. They would rather have someone else take the risks. When they star in a dud, it is never their own fault, it was the director, the script, etc. I can't recall the last time an actor or actress was honest enough to say : "I took on this role because I needed/wanted the money. I knew from day one that it would be a stinker. I am ashamed for my fans and those that have supported me in the past. I will never do that again. I care about the movie bsuiness, and my fans and to have them spend money on such a useless endeavor was duishonest of me." The few rare times that an actor has plunked down of his own personal money inmaking an independent movie, it has not worked well for him/her, and those leasons are quickly learned by any rising talent. Let someone else spend the money. I show upo on time, recite my lines and get paid at the end of the week. That is why for many years the talent was clamoring to share in video revenue but the studios wanted to keep that for themselves to pay off for the numerous flops they had to write off. I suppose the porn business is not that much different. Many women have tried to distribute their own stuff over the web. Some have been more or less successful and some others have fallen on their faces. Again you are asking a consumer to plunk down say $30 a month to see a certain limited and unkinown content featuring ONE person (alone or with others).
I am not asking anyone to do anything except not steal content. If you want to buy a dvd, or vod, pay for a legal download, all good by me. The prices you are quoting are really blow up, you can join cezarcapone.com, or realitykings, or bangbros, for $19 bucks a month and see hundreds of different girls, different scenes, and most have an introductory offer for $1. I think you may need to do some more research.
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 6:03PM
I'm really tired of that argument myself Woody. Companies have a right to demand a certain price for whatever they produce period. Companies that make what they believe is high-end product, certainly have a right to demand or expect a high price for it. The internet is a great and "legal" equalizer though. There are plenty of legit retailers that offer a good or slight discount on new or newer films, and especially on older film. And there is always the option of legit downloading or renting to those who need to cut costs or don't trust the quality of the product. And there is always the option to wait until the price drops to a more affordable price. If you can't do any of that, then you simply aren't meant to ever have or see it. [/quote] I agree with you 100%.
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 6:12PM
When, meaning at what point in his career, did Mel Gibson start producing his own movies? And when was it for Sandra Bullock? When you mean "producing", to what extent (how much of the movie project) did they plunk their own personal money in the project? Do you have actual figures? A "movie producer" in the movie mainstream world, does not necessarily mean someone who has put up ALL his own money in the WHOLE film project (100% financing). He could simply have put talent together, a script, etc, and either works for hire, or put up only a small or large sum of the movie project. And another thing about movie making. Hardly anything is done in a vacuum, meaning a movie project is put together, a movie is shot and then the producer (financier) shops it around for a distributor (domestic/foreign), DVD rights, etc. If you know what you are doing, you can line up investors and distributors and make money even if your movie fails or performs poorly at the box office. You may not be able to go back to them for another project, but you taken your shot with very little risk involved. When a movie star takes on the moniker "producer" it usually just adds another paycheck. The movie studio business of yore is gone, and talent and producers work independently. A movie star may say he she wants to produce but it does not have the same connotation of what it was 40-50 years ago. Edited by - Len801 on 4/1/2010 6:16:50 PM
Death is caused by swallowing small amounts of saliva over a long period of time. George Carlin 1567 Posts 2/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 6:32PM
[Link]
Len801 Deactivated User
754 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 1 2010 : 6:41PM
I could be asking people not to commit adultery, not to cheat on their partners, not be tax cheats, not to drive drunk, not to buy guns, not to indulge in alcohol or drugs, not to beat up their wives and children, to repay legitimate debts, but will it have any effect? Your saying it because you find it aborrent and whether it may affect your professional career, won't make it stop either. VOD or joining an internet site is always plunking down money for something you have NOT seen or heard (before you even see it). You know it involves...sex, but that's it. That is the prurient factor. You know very well that people just don't spend $20-30 just to see people screw in front of a camera. As with music, there has to be a compelling reason for you to just own a CD/DVD when barely only one song/scene of any interest to you. Which scene/which song? That is the problem. The porn industry does not seem to have that much interest in letting you know. Sure they may post a 2:30 min trailer for a new release they are trying to push, but what about something that came out 1-2-3-5-10 years ago?
Edited by - adt44 on 4/1/2010 9:31:28 AM
