Why buy porn anymore? (page 11)

Author	Post
NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 7:00AM Not at all BlackSix... For exactly that reason. What applies to one thing doesn't necessarily apply to something else. You ate pizza once. Does that mean you ALWAYS eat pizza? No, of course not. To assert such would be a logical fallacy. Things must be dealt with in a case-by-case manner Why doesn't this apply to child porn? In Child Porn (lets not even call it that, let's call it "Abusing A Minor And Recording It") someone is getting hurt. There's no evidence that anyone is getting hurt by people file-sharing.... [Link]
licker Senior Member Heretic, Iconoclast, Skeptic 1141 Posts 8/03	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 12:12PM juha wrote: Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm collected and published fairy tales. The didn't invent them. Click to expand Naughty naughty. Your hypocrisy is showing again. If J & W can't have copyright for telling the story in a book, then Disney can't have copyright for telling the story in a cartoon. Either "Snow White" is in the public domain, or it is not. The medium in which it is published doesn't change that. I invite you to try publishing your own modern CGI movie of this story, and watch how fast Disney's legal shock troops will drag you into court. And please explain why it is good for the community that Fleischer's "Gulliver's Travels" (1939) is public domain? Max Fleischer used to be Walt Disney's biggest competitor in the 30s. We should preserve his memory. Click to expand What is good is that any member of the public who cares can preserve his work, and nobody has a legal right to prevent them. The Max Fleischer preservation society can buy a cinema print of the movie and pay to have it restored, then issue it on DVDs of their own. They can even apply for a government grant or corporate sponsorship to perform the work, since it is completely legal. They can sell or give away the DVDs, entirely by their own choice. The smartest lawyer on Earth is powerless to prevent them. They can send DVDs to all of their members and encourage them to post copies on Bit Torrent so that his work will be archived on computers all over the world. [Link]
JimGunn Member Where The Teens Are 173 Posts 1/02	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 12:58PM NewRomancer wrote: There's no evidence that anyone is getting hurt by people file-sharing.... Click to expand I hate getting sucked back into this argument again, but you keep repeating this as if it were true. How could you possibly think that? (I frankly don't think you really believe it, it's just a justification in your mind for your selfishness...) You have to recognize that there's an entire generation of young people nowadays that would laugh at you if you even suggested that they pay for music or porn. How could that not hurt both the artists or studios and all the various other middlemen and service people that are involved in every aspect from production, post-production to advertising to distribution in the mass market? After all why should people pay when they can download it all for free? Of course, luckily many people still pay due to convenience (like the itunes model) or because they aren't so technologically savvy (older people) or because they have some scruples and wish to support the artists or studios, (big fans) or because they are connoisseurs of a niche (collectors). The most annoying thing about your posts is that you seem to take a perverse glee that studios or artists can do little to stop piracy. It shows a real immaturity on your part as far as I am concerned. Even for the most forward thinking companies who have embraced new technologies and business models like itunes for music & downloadable clip sales for adult producers, the reality is that there are detrimental consequences to piracy. Imagine the tens of thousands of dollars spent on filming high definition scenes for a web site and all the work that went into it and then two days later after it is launched the full site rip is up on the porn forums and indexed in google and available for download for free by anyone searching on that term. How can you say with a straight face that someone (or a lot of someones really) aren't being hurt? Don't get me wrong, I am all for technology, I have been lucky enough even as an independent producer to find new ways to license my content and sell my videos directly to the fans that were not available just a few years ago. So technology has it's positive side for sure. But at some point maybe several years or a decade into the future, it will be even harder than it is now to make money producing and selling porn since everyone will pretty much be used to downloading everything they want at whim. Unlike in the music business there are no live shows in porn to rely on as an income stream. The video itself is the only product, pretty much. Of course the industry will adapt in some ways, but that doesn't mean it will be as robust as it is now and productions will eventually have to slow down dramatically if it becomes that hard to eke out a profit. JimGunn.com / Sisterlicious.com [Link]
nateglass Member I must break you 201 Posts 12/05	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 1:09PM NewRomancer wrote: There's no evidence that anyone is getting hurt by people file-sharing.... Click to expand What's funny to me is that those like NewRomancer will trot this statement out over and over again claiming that there's no evidence of it. Then in the very next breath they'll demand that we believe that a person downloading something for free actually creates a future customer. Go back and look how many times they've said, "I downloaded it and then decided to buy it". That statement too isn't backed by any evidence and requires a leap of faith. While the first statement requires evidence, I guess the opposition's statement requires none. [Link]

NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 2:36PM So show EVIDENCE that downloading is hurting porn and or music.... Otherwise all you have is baseless opinion. [Link]
killbillvol69 All-Star Member ^Lucy Pinder 18634 Posts 4/08	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 3:42PM @NewRomancer: When you keep telling people to show evidence of something which you yourself have defined as being impossible to show evidence of, it gets a bit annoying after a while. So stop telling them to show evidence already. This thread is starting to remind me of Monty Python's "Argument Sketch" (video version, text version). [Link]
NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 5:20PM "So stop telling them to show evidence already." When they stop using it as an argument against downloading, I won't have to ask for evidence any longer. Seems fair enough to me... [Link]
Zoid Senior Member Boobies and Anal 2004 Posts 5/04	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 6:16PM Licker, I came across an article from a dude that sounds very much like you.. That's not you by any chance, is it? [Link]
killbillvol69 All-Star Member ^Lucy Pinder 18634 Posts 4/08	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 6:17PM NewRomancer wrote: When they stop using it as an argument against downloading, I won't have to ask for evidence any longer. Seems fair enough to me... Click to expand No, it's not fair enough. Because your request is disingenuous. You don't believe that it's possible to show evidence, therefore you shouldn't ask for it. You'd be better to just say "You can't prove that" or something; rather than asking again and again and again for something which you believe does not exist. [edit: added quote] Edited by - killbillvol69 on 9/13/2008 6:18:25 PM [Link]
killbillvol69 All-Star Member ^Lucy Pinder 18634 Posts 4/08	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 6:20PM @NewRomancer: It's kind of like asking a question that everyone already knows that you know the answer to. It sounds coy, cocky, arrogant, and annoying as all hell. It certainly won't make you any friends, and it quite likely will make people listen to you far less. [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 6:52PM Actually it can be proven, and if NewRomancer would like to fund it I'll be happy to do the study. All you have to do to prove that someone was financially hurt is get one person out of all the people who have downloaded a movie, adult or mainstream, to say that if they couldn't have downloaded it illegally that they would have rented it. You have now proven that a video store was hurt by illegal downloading. To prove that a distributor was hurt financially all you have to do is get enough people in one area to say they would have rented a title that would have caused a video store, or even Netflix, to have purchased one more copy. At that point you have proven that the distributor didn't sell at least one copy due to illegal downloading. And you have now proven that it hurt the industry. Of course, being a rational person, I can accept the logic that if 50,000 people download one movie, which they sought out on their own indicating they had interest in that title, that if they couldn't have downloaded it illegally at least one of those people would have rented it. Therefore proving harm due to illegal downloading. The other side of this is since NewRomancer keeps claiming that there is no harm from illegal downloading. I'd like to see the proof of this. Especially since it is harder since to do that. NewRomancer will have to contact everyone that has ever illegally downloaded a movie and have them sign off that if not available they wouldn't have rented, bought or gone to a theater to see any title they ever downloaded. So, NewRomancer, please offer the proof that there is no harm financially to the industry from illegal downloading. Since you have asked everyone with an opposing view to offer up proof, I think it's only fair to ask you for your proof. Edited by - Flash on 9/13/2008 6:53:26 PM [Link]
NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 10:19PM "please offer the proof that there is no harm financially to the industry from illegal downloading" One never seeks to prove a negative... that's not how logic or evidence or proof work.... [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 10:45PM Then without proof I suggest that you stop saying there isn't harm. I've shown how the opposite can be proven and how the odds of it being proven are extremely high. [Link]
licker Senior Member Heretic, Iconoclast, Skeptic 1141 Posts 8/03	Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 11:55PM Zoid wrote: Licker, I came across an article from a dude that sounds very much like you.. That's not you by any chance, is it? Click to expand No, it's not me. I had never heard of that guy before, but he seems to have similar ideas to me, definitely. It's not surprising really. Copyright reform is being widely discussed in the online community. I've been hearing about it for years. I first came to the idea of copyright reform because of my work as a software developer. There is a weird and dangerous distortion of copyright known as "software patents" that presently exists only in the USA. The US patent office has allowed individual companies to patent blatantly obvious programming techniques that have been in use for decades. This is basically like allowing me to walk in off the street and patent something like a garden spade or a teaspoon, then suck money from all the companies who make them. It is used to prevent new software development companies from releasing their own original work onto the market in competition with large established companies. For example, if you write a program that allows the user to select something by double clicking on it with a mouse, you are violating a Microsoft patent. If such laws spread through the western world, we will be essentially handing over the entire software industry to India and China. So far, this contemptible concept has not spread to other countries of the world, but US companies are spending a fortune on lobbying in an attempt to buy such laws in Europe. Researching this subject on line soon led me to the whole copyright discussion, including the general public license, the free software movement, the gangster tactics of the RIAA, and the news stories of programmers going to jail because they wrote programs that American Capitalism did not like. That made it personal. Now they are attacking me where I live. US "intellectual property" law is trying to deny me the right to make an honest living by writing new software. It is trying to prevent me from making an original contribution to my community, purely so corporate drones can be paid money for nothing. It is trying to reach out to my own country, and attack me through phony "trade agreements". I won't have it! These new laws are my enemy, and the enemy of my civilization. If I can convince anyone to prevent or repeal them, I will. Disclaimer: Movies are very different to computer programs of course, and the above opinions and concerns do not apply to them. Someone who makes a movie needs to be able to get a decent return on their investment. That means they should have exclusive copyright for a reasonable time. I happen to think thirty years is reasonable, that's all. [Link]

Loraine Senior Member 1559 Posts 3/04	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 12:20AM Just out of interest and on a slightly different note - companies who persist in pirating DVD's are are being pursued with results. Edited by - Loraine on 9/14/2008 12:20:46 AM [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 1:19AM Thanks Loraine, that's nice to see. [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 1:46AM NewRomancer wrote: No, of course not. To assert such would be a logical fallacy. Things must be dealt with in a case-by-case manner Why doesn't this apply to child porn? In Child Porn (lets not even call it that, let's call it "Abusing A Minor And Recording It") someone is getting hurt. There's no evidence that anyone is getting hurt by people file-sharing.... Click to expand I knew it was stretch to compare those two things but how about this: vandalism. Just because we can't stop it does that mean that efforts to curb it shouldn't be abandoned? Now if you're saying that the efforts necessary to curb it would impinge on other, more significant rights, than I would agree. For example, I don't support putting cameras on every street corner to prevent vandalism because the right to privacy and free movement from government control outweighs any potential benefits. What would you identify as the more significant rights that need to be protected here? Or am I putting words in your mouth? [Link]
Gunzo Senior Member 1377 Posts 2/05	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 3:53AM Graffitti is considered vandalism, but not really because of how it improves the cityscape with color but because what it stands for. Similarly, the internet with its free distribution is a threat with the potential to un-brainwash citizens. So it's not about right or wrong, it's about politics. [Link]
Zoid Senior Member Boobies and Anal 2004 Posts 5/04	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 5:07AM licker wrote: There is a weird and dangerous distortion of copyright known as "software patents" that presently exists only in the USA. The US patent office has allowed individual companies to patent blatantly obvious programming techniques that have been in use for decades. Click to expand But why reform copyright laws when this is (obviously) about patent laws? Copyright doesn't protect ideas or concepts. I am also against the monopolization of technology (including software) for prolonged periods of time; however and IMHO, the point becomes moot when we talk about purely creative works, and especially in the entertainment sector. [Link]
licker Senior Member Heretic, Iconoclast, Skeptic 1141 Posts 8/03	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 7:58AM Zoid wrote: But why reform copyright laws when this is (obviously) about patent laws? Click to expand I understand the distinction. I was simply describing the process by which I became interested in "intellectual property" law in general. Both patent and copyright law need reform, but for different reasons in each case. [Link]
NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 8:40AM "Then without proof I suggest that you stop saying there isn't harm." Then you have to stop saying that there is, because you haven't shown where there IS any... you may have theories, but without evidence that's all they are. Again, assertions of harm are immaterial. Partially because there's no proof either way, and partially because file-sharing isn't ever going to go away whether there's harm or not... The concept, the definition, the laws pertaining to "Intellectual property" are changing, and it's more likely to turn out "Star Trek" than it is "China" "It sounds coy, cocky, arrogant, and annoying as all hell." Again, that's just more ad hominem. [Link]
Tobin Deactivated User 450 Posts 11/07	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 8:58AM NewRomancer wrote: "They'll simply move on and find a more profitable business" Ya... that'll happen... (The same way cassette tapes killed the music industry... Oh... wait... that's right... that never happened, despite all the hew and cry to the contrary!) This is a picture of me not holding my breath that porn is going to go away any time soon. The only ones who will go away, are the ones who are unable or unwilling to adapt to the digital age.... One cannot 'put the genie back into the bottle'. The internet is a strong but emerging part of the equation, and it's very nature is such that no 'draconian' attempts to control it are ever going to work.... So, other methods must be adopted to encourage people to become and remain customers if you wish to sell your products, taking into account that someone somewhere is always going to be able to get a copy of your shit for free if they really want to and there's not a damn thing you can do to stop them. The evidence is there in bucketfuls that people are ready and willing to PAY for what they want.... But what they want has become VERY specific (partially because production has become so much easier, and partially because communication between consumer and producer is also much easier) and if they can't find it from one source, they will happily find it from another. Click to expand Very few people will pay for what they want. [Link]
Zoid Senior Member Boobies and Anal 2004 Posts 5/04	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 9:15AM NewRomancer, I have some fascinating reading material for you. [Link]
NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 9:43AM "Very few people will pay for what they want." Then perhaps those who wish to sell things need to find ways to sweeten their deals, because one cannot 'push' the market the way some here seem to want to.... Zoid... Give me some time to read that.... the way things are going lately, it might even be a few days... I also want to check into the "IPI" to see who they really are and what they really stand for. [Link]

Brian_Wallace Member 108 Posts 6/04	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 11:56AM Wow! You step away for a bit to go surfing and a trail marathon (which I guess I paid for from being a "leech"), come back and there's eight million spinning-the-wheels words. It's all so circular but I think I agree with "New Romancer" and "licker." I think there's a lot of people who are bitter and angry about what's happening and they can't do anything to stop it. "It's a brand new era. It feels great. It's a brand new era. But it came too late." You know what the current adult industry is like? It's like pagers. Do they even make pagers any more? No. Because cell phones do everything a pager can do and more (like actually place the call.) It's still up in the air if the adult industry can figure out how to make cell phones and not pagers. My initial guess is "no." The producers/distributors/etc. of the adult industry aren't exactly Wharton grads. It was fun while it lasted but it's over. We will all look back upon these days fondly. Brian P.S. "Evidence." "EVIDENCE!" Damned lies and statistics. I'm certainly willing to contribute my mathematical genius (or at least degree) to any study, etc. Do I understand this argument correctly? Some of you (realists, I'd label them) are saying "downloading content for free is hurting AND HELPING the industry. Hopefully, the adult industry can find a way to change their business plan to survive the loss in revenue." The other side (let's label them "Nostalgists who didn't know how good they had it in 1996.") have the Gene Simmons attitude: "String them up by their balls. Free downloading of movies, music, porn, etc. is worse than murder and child molestation COMBINED. If we arrested or heavily fined EVERY illegal downloader then things would go back to the 'way things were.' When we all could afford our mortgage payments." Is that basically it? The two sides of it? [Link]
ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 12:25PM Brian_Wallace wrote: Is that basically it? The two sides of it? Click to expand No. It's more complex than that. [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 2:06PM No my stance is that it is equivalent of shoplifting. It's different than cell phones and pagers. When cell phones came people didn't turn around and start rampantly stealing them. What's going on here is that people have chosen to steal when a variety of options are available. DVD, VOD, rental, etc. The options the thieves want are available, they just cost money. And mostly instead of putting in security guards to cut down on the theft society as deemed it okay and is leaving locks off the store doors. And no I want more effort to go to catching child porn and murder. The reason I had brought up the LAPD murder conviction rate was people in the thread have seemed to have made the connection that you can't stop all illegal downloading so it isn't worth it to stop any. I was curious how that worked with other crimes. Of course maybe the people who chose to steal their entertainment will win. Studios will find a way to make money even though their consumers are just going to steal their product. They could go with CGI advertisements. For instance, they could put a CGI tattoo of the words "Drink Pepsi" on the cock as it's fucking. And add a CGI tattoo for Vagisil above the pussy. No one will like it and those that steal their entertainment would I'm sure join in with those who pay condemning the act however at least the studio would make money off the endorsements. [Link]
killbillvol69 All-Star Member ^Lucy Pinder 18634 Posts 4/08	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 3:37PM NewRomancer wrote: "It sounds coy, cocky, arrogant, and annoying as all hell." Again, that's just more ad hominem. Click to expand NewRomancer, I believe you've misunderstood the point of my post. Unlike many people here, I wasn't arguing with you. In order for an argument to be ad hominem, it has to be an argument in the first place. I also was not insulting you or criticizing your character, which is what makes an argument become ad hominem. What I was doing was just trying to help you out a bit, in explaining that the way you were presenting yourself to others was perhaps making you seem coy, cocky and arrogant. In no way did I imply that you actually are these things. In fact, if I thought you were any of these things, it would have made no sense to point it out to you. Instead, I pointed it out expressly because I assumed you are not coy, cocky or arrogant, and that you perhaps didn't realize you were coming across this way. That's all. I was just trying to help you argue more effectively. I apologize for making you think I was trying to insult you or criticize your personality. I do, however, still stand by my claim that in any situation, if someone asks for something that they know does not exist, they will indeed look coy, cocky and arrogant. (By the way, I noticed that you did stop doing this after my posts; maybe it was because of me, and maybe not. Either way, I was happy to see you change your approach to one that seems more effective.) [Link]
ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 3:41PM Flash wrote: What's going on here is that people have chosen to steal when a variety of options are available. DVD, VOD, rental, etc. The options the thieves want are available, they just cost money. Click to expand Options, yes. But still there is a sizeable alienated population. 1. Underage people or without I.D. 2. People w/o a CreditCard 3. People who live in "do not ship" zipcodes 4. People who have no local pornshop 5. People who live a "cash only" lifestyle (Of course there is overlap/intertwine among the above) I'm not saying that all these people would necessarily become buyers if these barriers were suddenly eliminated, but some probably would buy more than they are buying today. More money coming in. That's the real bottom line, right? [Link]
NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 4:07PM "In no way did I imply that you actually are these things." I apologise if I seemed to be DENYING that I wasn't those thing! LOL And worse! [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 5:33PM ninja1 wrote: 1. Underage people or without I.D. 2. People w/o a CreditCard 3. People who live in "do not ship" zipcodes 4. People who have no local pornshop 5. People who live a "cash only" lifestyle (Of course there is overlap/intertwine among the above) Click to expand A lot of these problems though aren't fixable on a whole. If you live in a do not ship zip code chances are you don't have a local porn shop. People who don't have ID have made their own problem. Everywhere I have lived you can get a non-drivers ID card which can be used for porn, beer, cigarettes, etc. Underage is a whole different problem that no fix will ever solve for porn. If you don't have a credit card, debit cards are available through banks to solve that problem. Some people will also have to accept that choices they make may limit their options. For instance someone who chooses not to have a bank account or credit card, they have also decided they can't shop online. It's insane for them to believe that companies have to adjust to their choice. Since they made the choice, they can go to the local porn store to buy. I also suspect that this list makes up the minimum of the illegal downloading. I think, but could be wrong, that the majority of illegal downloaders just don't want to pay for something if they can find a way not to. And several of go away when dealing with mainstream material yet they are having just as much of a problem on that side as well. That problem isn't limited to just the internet. I can't tell you how many times in recent years I have been stuck behind someone in line where a manager has to get involved because a customer is irate because they collected enough coupons that not only should the item be free in their opinion but they are supposed to get money back from the store. It doesn't matter that it says one coupon per customer or not valid for over the store price. [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 5:36PM Gunzo wrote: Graffitti is considered vandalism, but not really because of how it improves the cityscape with color but because what it stands for. Click to expand And how it is placed without permission of the property owner. I've had to clean up these colored portions of the cityscape when people have decided to adorn where I have lived with it, without my or the landlord's permission. Maybe if the artists got permission from the property owner, or city where the city is the owner, they wouldn't be treated the same way. [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 5:47PM NewRomancer wrote: "Then without proof I suggest that you stop saying there isn't harm." Then you have to stop saying that there is, because you haven't shown where there IS any... you may have theories, but without evidence that's all they are. Click to expand I can't prove that gravity truly exists everywhere on the surface of Earth without having it tested everywhere. A reasonable person will accept that it exists everywhere on the surface of the Earth but due to some anomaly there could be a small area where it doesn't. Just as a reasonable person should find it hard to believe that out of all the illegal downloads not one would equal a rental. Of course when I read people posting elsewhere that they feel it is their right to illegally download a movie to decide whether they should purchase it it has been proven to me that that would have equaled a rental and therefore there is harm. And I am willing to concede that if we have reached the point where none would equal at minimum a rental and we have become a society of thieves then maybe we are better off if all the entertainment companies went out of business. Maybe in 25 years after people realize how much they missed that kind of entertainment they would be willing to pay for it again. [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 6:37PM I feel like I should add that at this point the studios are starting to become part of the problem as well. Not in the ways mentioned in this thread, but by not trying to shut down illegal file sharing systems or prosecute illegal downloaders. I know that some companies have taken steps to stop this practice but not enough have and none of them, adult or mainstream, are getting it into the news. If studios allow it to continue to look like a crime that they don't care about by lack of arrests/prosecutions then I suspect it will continue to skyrocket. [Link]

nateglass Member I must break you 201 Posts 12/05	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 11:41PM The fucked up thing (and I swear I don't think ANYONE on this board is understanding it) is that there are people WITHIN this industry that are profiting from the copyright infringement. There are STUDIOS (Penthouse, Bang, Brazzers) that own tube sites that contain content they don't own. Those studios are making major bank off of content that IS NOT THEIRS. There are also companies that are subsidizing piracy by paying ILLEGAL tube sites for advertising space (Brazzers, Penthouse by way of Adult Friend Finder). That's my beef. Downloaders will be there always...we can't stop that...but those torrent and tube sites couldn't stay in business without advertising revenue, and THAT IS EXACTLY WHERE THE INDUSTRY NEEDS TO START LEGAL PROCEEDINGS. Downloading is great...but if someone is going to make money by operating a tube site...they should do it by using content they either OWN or have LEGALLY LICENSED. Does anyone get this, or am I just banging my head against the wall? [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 11:57PM Nate, that's not right either. I can't believe that other industry companies haven't come down on the ones in the industry doing this. [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 2:50AM Brian_Wallace wrote: It was fun while it lasted but it's over. We will all look back upon these days fondly. Click to expand Why? [Link]
BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 2:54AM Gunzo wrote: Graffitti is considered vandalism, but not really because of how it improves the cityscape with color but because what it stands for. Similarly, the internet with its free distribution is a threat with the potential to un-brainwash citizens. So it's not about right or wrong, it's about politics. Click to expand I don't see how you can compare graffitti to downloading. Is downloading an artform? To clarify, by vandalism I meant things like breaking windows, how is that like graffitti and how does it lead to un-brainwashing citizens? [Link]
Gunzo Senior Member 1377 Posts 2/05	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 4:35AM When graffitti is on 'illegal' surfaces it's not an artform, it's just vandalism. I could dress up like a clown and throw glass animals through windows and call it art, but it would still be vandalism if I didn't have permission, no matter how great the art. When it comes to distribution via the internet, the big companies lost a lot of their power as selectors. They used to have more brainwashing power. And making people think is dangerous for the entire community, especially when there's very little money involved. Organized crime is bad, but people not believing in money is even worse, because after all money is the foundation of our socitety. [Link]
NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 10:19AM "but those torrent and tube sites couldn't stay in business without advertising revenue, and THAT IS EXACTLY WHERE THE INDUSTRY NEEDS TO START LEGAL PROCEEDINGS." They'd probably get better results if they owned the torrent sites themselves, and generated $$ from other peoples adds... See... I'd call that using the current system to ones advantage. [Link]
nateglass Member I must break you 201 Posts 12/05	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 11:30AM NewRomancer wrote: "but those torrent and tube sites couldn't stay in business without advertising revenue, and THAT IS EXACTLY WHERE THE INDUSTRY NEEDS TO START LEGAL PROCEEDINGS." They'd probably get better results if they owned the torrent sites themselves, and generated $$ from other peoples adds... See... I'd call that using the current system to ones advantage. Click to expand Oh yeah...can't beat those illegally profiting off others works...then JOIN those in illegally profiting off of others works. Brilliant man! I choose.....BUSINESS ETHICS - Billy Madison [Link]
NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 1:09PM "BUSINESS ETHICS" Ha! Like Military Intelligence, Postal Service or Civil War.... The market has changed, and will continue to change... and those that change WITH it will survive, and those that don't will fail and vanish. One will NEVER plug all the holes in distribution. And the internet will only ever serve to widen them. Sell your dvds in a brick&mortar store... some people will buy them there Sell your movies, whole, or scene by scene from online stores... some people will buy them there Give your movies away through a torrent site YOU own, and collect revenue generated by adds on that site, and you'll make money off people getting your movie for free... You might even make more there than from the b&m or online stores... [Link]
juha Senior Member 2752 Posts 3/05	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 3:14PM NewRomancer wrote: Give your movies away through a torrent site YOU own, and collect revenue generated by adds on that site, and you'll make money off people getting your movie for free... Click to expand The torrent users aren't a very attractive market segment. Why should any company advertise a product to users who aren't potential buyers? Torrent users want it all and they want it all for free. No market for advertisement. Edited by - juha on 9/15/2008 3:15:36 PM [Link]
NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 3:31PM I'll be happy to discuss your points, after you've discussed mine. Or is being "done with me" a one way street? [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 4:39PM NewRomancer wrote: Sell your dvds in a brick&mortar store... some people will buy them there Sell your movies, whole, or scene by scene from online stores... some people will buy them there Click to expand Why bother, you have attested to time and time again that illegal downloading doesn't cause harm. So why keep these avenues open. By your logic, everyone can download off a torrent site for free without causing harm so these avenues must not be actually making money. NewRomancer wrote: Give your movies away through a torrent site YOU own, and collect revenue generated by adds on that site, and you'll make money off people getting your movie for free... You might even make more there than from the b&m or online stores... Click to expand And what is to entice the people to come to each companies site. You haven't stopped the large filesharing sites that have movies from all companies. So now each company will have to come up with a gimmick to get downloaders to go to multiple sites to get what they can at one. Should they advertise on the illegal sites? Come download the movie you are currently downloading at ours. That's a real catcher. Maybe they should start paying the people to come and download for free off the official site. No matter what they do to make the file nicer by your own statements here it will show up on the illegal sites. And the actual companies still have a massive barrier. The cost to create the material and get it up on the web. The illegal sites just have to keep the computers running. People come and put up the material for them and no one involved has paid a dime to create the material. It seems under your ideal internet world the only way to make money would be for all the studios to shutdown and just steal each others material and make whatever they can off of the advertising. [Link]
NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 4:49PM "So why keep these avenues open." I'm not the one trying to suggest, without any evidence, that they are in any trouble in the first place.... "You haven't stopped the large filesharing sites that have movies from all companies." Of course not.... It's pointless to even try cause they're NEVER going away. When you can't beat 'em, suck 'em... no! JOIN 'em! USE the torrent sites to make $$ off the so-called 'pirates'. [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 5:17PM How, if the studios give away their movies there is no longer a reason to buy the DVD. Then it will be legal to download their titles for free. Why would I or anyone else now buy a DVD when it is now perfectly legal to download it. Why would anyone buy VOD, it's now free and legal. And more than that as you have ascertained previously over and over and over again since there is no acceptable proof of harm from illegal downloading so if everyone who currently purchases DVD choose to start downloading for free nothing has been harmed. [Link]
NewRomancer Deactivated User under THEIR avatar 738 Posts 7/08	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 5:39PM Asked and answered. [Link]
Flash Golden Age Classic 11018 Posts 5/01	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 6:45PM No you haven't answered. You are just saying join them yet you offer no logistics on how it would actually work to benefit the companies. Especially since you have now destroyed DVD and VOD money they were making. Prove to me how your statements would work to make the companies at least the amount of money they are making now. You claim to want to discuss points. You claim that you aren't just a thief trying to justify why illegal downloads aren't wrong. I'm trying to give you a chance to explain how this would work. So please do so. [Link]
ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08	Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 7:22PM I think he is just piggybacking on whomever said the tube/torrent sites are making a ton of money from ad revenues. If you set up your own tube/torrent site, you could be similarly pocketing a similar ton of money from ad revenues. If you were some big-time studio, you will have access to millions of hours of free(to you) porn to lure the users to your site. Luring more users = more advertising $$. That's how it works. I think. [Link]

Author

Post

NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 7:00AM

Not at all BlackSix... For exactly that reason. What applies to one thing doesn't necessarily apply to something else.
You ate pizza once. Does that mean you ALWAYS eat pizza?
No, of course not. To assert such would be a logical fallacy. Things must be dealt with in a case-by-case manner
Why doesn't this apply to child porn? In Child Porn (lets not even call it that, let's call it "Abusing A Minor And Recording It") someone is getting hurt. There's no evidence that anyone is getting hurt by people file-sharing....

[Link]

licker
Senior Member

Heretic, Iconoclast, Skeptic
1141 Posts
8/03

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 12:12PM

Naughty naughty. Your hypocrisy is showing again. If J & W can't have copyright for telling the story in a book, then Disney can't have copyright for telling the story in a cartoon. Either "Snow White" is in the public domain, or it is not. The medium in which it is published doesn't change that. I invite you to try publishing your own modern CGI movie of this story, and watch how fast Disney's legal shock troops will drag you into court.

What is good is that any member of the public who cares can preserve his work, and nobody has a legal right to prevent them. The Max Fleischer preservation society can buy a cinema print of the movie and pay to have it restored, then issue it on DVDs of their own. They can even apply for a government grant or corporate sponsorship to perform the work, since it is completely legal. They can sell or give away the DVDs, entirely by their own choice. The smartest lawyer on Earth is powerless to prevent them. They can send DVDs to all of their members and encourage them to post copies on Bit Torrent so that his work will be archived on computers all over the world.

[Link]

JimGunn
Member

Where The Teens Are
173 Posts
1/02

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 12:58PM

I hate getting sucked back into this argument again, but you keep repeating this as if it were true. How could you possibly think that? (I frankly don't think you really believe it, it's just a justification in your mind for your selfishness...) You have to recognize that there's an entire generation of young people nowadays that would laugh at you if you even suggested that they pay for music or porn. How could that not hurt both the artists or studios and all the various other middlemen and service people that are involved in every aspect from production, post-production to advertising to distribution in the mass market? After all why should people pay when they can download it all for free? Of course, luckily many people still pay due to convenience (like the itunes model) or because they aren't so technologically savvy (older people) or because they have some scruples and wish to support the artists or studios, (big fans) or because they are connoisseurs of a niche (collectors).
The most annoying thing about your posts is that you seem to take a perverse glee that studios or artists can do little to stop piracy. It shows a real immaturity on your part as far as I am concerned. Even for the most forward thinking companies who have embraced new technologies and business models like itunes for music & downloadable clip sales for adult producers, the reality is that there are detrimental consequences to piracy. Imagine the tens of thousands of dollars spent on filming high definition scenes for a web site and all the work that went into it and then two days later after it is launched the full site rip is up on the porn forums and indexed in google and available for download for free by anyone searching on that term. How can you say with a straight face that someone (or a lot of someones really) aren't being hurt?
Don't get me wrong, I am all for technology, I have been lucky enough even as an independent producer to find new ways to license my content and sell my videos directly to the fans that were not available just a few years ago. So technology has it's positive side for sure. But at some point maybe several years or a decade into the future, it will be even harder than it is now to make money producing and selling porn since everyone will pretty much be used to downloading everything they want at whim. Unlike in the music business there are no live shows in porn to rely on as an income stream. The video itself is the only product, pretty much. Of course the industry will adapt in some ways, but that doesn't mean it will be as robust as it is now and productions will eventually have to slow down dramatically if it becomes that hard to eke out a profit.
JimGunn.com / Sisterlicious.com

[Link]

nateglass
Member

I must break you
201 Posts
12/05

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 1:09PM

What's funny to me is that those like NewRomancer will trot this statement out over and over again claiming that there's no evidence of it. Then in the very next breath they'll demand that we believe that a person downloading something for free actually creates a future customer. Go back and look how many times they've said, "I downloaded it and then decided to buy it". That statement too isn't backed by any evidence and requires a leap of faith. While the first statement requires evidence, I guess the opposition's statement requires none.

[Link]

NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 2:36PM

So show EVIDENCE that downloading is hurting porn and or music....
Otherwise all you have is baseless opinion.

[Link]

killbillvol69

All-Star Member

^Lucy Pinder
18634 Posts
4/08

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 3:42PM

@NewRomancer: When you keep telling people to show evidence of something which you yourself have defined as being impossible to show evidence of, it gets a bit annoying after a while.
So stop telling them to show evidence already.
This thread is starting to remind me of Monty Python's "Argument Sketch" (video version, text version).

[Link]

NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 5:20PM

"So stop telling them to show evidence already."
When they stop using it as an argument against downloading, I won't have to ask for evidence any longer.
Seems fair enough to me...

[Link]

Zoid
Senior Member

Boobies and Anal
2004 Posts
5/04

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 6:16PM

Licker, I came across an article from a dude that sounds very much like you.. That's not you by any chance, is it?

[Link]

killbillvol69

All-Star Member

^Lucy Pinder
18634 Posts
4/08

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 6:17PM

No, it's not fair enough. Because your request is disingenuous. You don't believe that it's possible to show evidence, therefore you shouldn't ask for it.
You'd be better to just say "You can't prove that" or something; rather than asking again and again and again for something which you believe does not exist.
[edit: added quote]
Edited by - killbillvol69 on 9/13/2008 6:18:25 PM

[Link]

killbillvol69

All-Star Member

^Lucy Pinder
18634 Posts
4/08

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 6:20PM

@NewRomancer: It's kind of like asking a question that everyone already knows that you know the answer to. It sounds coy, cocky, arrogant, and annoying as all hell.
It certainly won't make you any friends, and it quite likely will make people listen to you far less.

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11018 Posts
5/01

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 6:52PM

Actually it can be proven, and if NewRomancer would like to fund it I'll be happy to do the study. All you have to do to prove that someone was financially hurt is get one person out of all the people who have downloaded a movie, adult or mainstream, to say that if they couldn't have downloaded it illegally that they would have rented it. You have now proven that a video store was hurt by illegal downloading. To prove that a distributor was hurt financially all you have to do is get enough people in one area to say they would have rented a title that would have caused a video store, or even Netflix, to have purchased one more copy. At that point you have proven that the distributor didn't sell at least one copy due to illegal downloading. And you have now proven that it hurt the industry.
Of course, being a rational person, I can accept the logic that if 50,000 people download one movie, which they sought out on their own indicating they had interest in that title, that if they couldn't have downloaded it illegally at least one of those people would have rented it. Therefore proving harm due to illegal downloading.
The other side of this is since NewRomancer keeps claiming that there is no harm from illegal downloading. I'd like to see the proof of this. Especially since it is harder since to do that. NewRomancer will have to contact everyone that has ever illegally downloaded a movie and have them sign off that if not available they wouldn't have rented, bought or gone to a theater to see any title they ever downloaded.
So, NewRomancer, please offer the proof that there is no harm financially to the industry from illegal downloading. Since you have asked everyone with an opposing view to offer up proof, I think it's only fair to ask you for your proof.
Edited by - Flash on 9/13/2008 6:53:26 PM

[Link]

NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 10:19PM

"please offer the proof that there is no harm financially to the industry from illegal downloading"
One never seeks to prove a negative... that's not how logic or evidence or proof work....

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11018 Posts
5/01

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 10:45PM

Then without proof I suggest that you stop saying there isn't harm. I've shown how the opposite can be proven and how the odds of it being proven are extremely high.

[Link]

licker
Senior Member

Heretic, Iconoclast, Skeptic
1141 Posts
8/03

Posted - Sep 13 2008 : 11:55PM

No, it's not me. I had never heard of that guy before, but he seems to have similar ideas to me, definitely. It's not surprising really. Copyright reform is being widely discussed in the online community. I've been hearing about it for years.
I first came to the idea of copyright reform because of my work as a software developer. There is a weird and dangerous distortion of copyright known as "software patents" that presently exists only in the USA. The US patent office has allowed individual companies to patent blatantly obvious programming techniques that have been in use for decades. This is basically like allowing me to walk in off the street and patent something like a garden spade or a teaspoon, then suck money from all the companies who make them. It is used to prevent new software development companies from releasing their own original work onto the market in competition with large established companies.
For example, if you write a program that allows the user to select something by double clicking on it with a mouse, you are violating a Microsoft patent. If such laws spread through the western world, we will be essentially handing over the entire software industry to India and China.
So far, this contemptible concept has not spread to other countries of the world, but US companies are spending a fortune on lobbying in an attempt to buy such laws in Europe.
Researching this subject on line soon led me to the whole copyright discussion, including the general public license, the free software movement, the gangster tactics of the RIAA, and the news stories of programmers going to jail because they wrote programs that American Capitalism did not like.
That made it personal. Now they are attacking me where I live. US "intellectual property" law is trying to deny me the right to make an honest living by writing new software. It is trying to prevent me from making an original contribution to my community, purely so corporate drones can be paid money for nothing. It is trying to reach out to my own country, and attack me through phony "trade agreements". I won't have it!

These new laws are my enemy, and the enemy of my civilization.

If I can convince anyone to prevent or repeal them, I will.
Disclaimer: Movies are very different to computer programs of course, and the above opinions and concerns do not apply to them. Someone who makes a movie needs to be able to get a decent return on their investment. That means they should have exclusive copyright for a reasonable time. I happen to think thirty years is reasonable, that's all.

[Link]

Loraine
Senior Member

1559 Posts
3/04

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 12:20AM

Just out of interest and on a slightly different note - companies who persist in pirating DVD's are are being pursued with results.

Edited by - Loraine on 9/14/2008 12:20:46 AM

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11018 Posts
5/01

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 1:19AM

Thanks Loraine, that's nice to see.

[Link]

BlackSix

All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 1:46AM

I knew it was stretch to compare those two things but how about this: vandalism. Just because we can't stop it does that mean that efforts to curb it shouldn't be abandoned? Now if you're saying that the efforts necessary to curb it would impinge on other, more significant rights, than I would agree. For example, I don't support putting cameras on every street corner to prevent vandalism because the right to privacy and free movement from government control outweighs any potential benefits.
What would you identify as the more significant rights that need to be protected here? Or am I putting words in your mouth?

[Link]

Gunzo
Senior Member

1377 Posts
2/05

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 3:53AM

Graffitti is considered vandalism, but not really because of how it improves the cityscape with color but because what it stands for. Similarly, the internet with its free distribution is a threat with the potential to un-brainwash citizens. So it's not about right or wrong, it's about politics.

[Link]

Zoid
Senior Member

Boobies and Anal
2004 Posts
5/04

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 5:07AM

But why reform copyright laws when this is (obviously) about patent laws? Copyright doesn't protect ideas or concepts. I am also against the monopolization of technology (including software) for prolonged periods of time; however and IMHO, the point becomes moot when we talk about purely creative works, and especially in the entertainment sector.

[Link]

licker
Senior Member

Heretic, Iconoclast, Skeptic
1141 Posts
8/03

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 7:58AM

I understand the distinction. I was simply describing the process by which I became interested in "intellectual property" law in general. Both patent and copyright law need reform, but for different reasons in each case.

[Link]

NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 8:40AM

"Then without proof I suggest that you stop saying there isn't harm."
Then you have to stop saying that there is, because you haven't shown where there IS any... you may have theories, but without evidence that's all they are.
Again, assertions of harm are immaterial. Partially because there's no proof either way, and partially because file-sharing isn't ever going to go away whether there's harm or not...
The concept, the definition, the laws pertaining to "Intellectual property" are changing, and it's more likely to turn out "Star Trek" than it is "China"
"It sounds coy, cocky, arrogant, and annoying as all hell."
Again, that's just more ad hominem.

[Link]

Tobin
Deactivated User

450 Posts
11/07

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 8:58AM

NewRomancer wrote:
"They'll simply move on and find a more profitable business"
Ya... that'll happen... (The same way cassette tapes killed the music industry... Oh... wait... that's right... that never happened, despite all the hew and cry to the contrary!)
This is a picture of me not holding my breath that porn is going to go away any time soon.
The only ones who will go away, are the ones who are unable or unwilling to adapt to the digital age....
One cannot 'put the genie back into the bottle'. The internet is a strong but emerging part of the equation, and it's very nature is such that no 'draconian' attempts to control it are ever going to work.... So, other methods must be adopted to encourage people to become and remain customers if you wish to sell your products, taking into account that someone somewhere is always going to be able to get a copy of your shit for free if they really want to and there's not a damn thing you can do to stop them.
The evidence is there in bucketfuls that people are ready and willing to PAY for what they want.... But what they want has become VERY specific (partially because production has become so much easier, and partially because communication between consumer and producer is also much easier) and if they can't find it from one source, they will happily find it from another.
Click to expand

Very few people will pay for what they want.

[Link]

Zoid
Senior Member

Boobies and Anal
2004 Posts
5/04

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 9:15AM

NewRomancer, I have some fascinating reading material for you.

[Link]

NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 9:43AM

"Very few people will pay for what they want."
Then perhaps those who wish to sell things need to find ways to sweeten their deals, because one cannot 'push' the market the way some here seem to want to....
Zoid... Give me some time to read that.... the way things are going lately, it might even be a few days... I also want to check into the "IPI" to see who they really are and what they really stand for.

[Link]

Brian_Wallace
Member

108 Posts
6/04

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 11:56AM

Wow! You step away for a bit to go surfing and a trail marathon (which I guess I paid for from being a "leech"), come back and there's eight million spinning-the-wheels words.
It's all so circular but I think I agree with "New Romancer" and "licker." I think there's a lot of people who are bitter and angry about what's happening and they can't do anything to stop it.
"It's a brand new era. It feels great. It's a brand new era. But it came too late."
You know what the current adult industry is like? It's like pagers. Do they even make pagers any more? No. Because cell phones do everything a pager can do and more (like actually place the call.) It's still up in the air if the adult industry can figure out how to make cell phones and not pagers.
My initial guess is "no." The producers/distributors/etc. of the adult industry aren't exactly Wharton grads.
It was fun while it lasted but it's over. We will all look back upon these days fondly.
Brian
P.S. "Evidence." "EVIDENCE!" Damned lies and statistics. I'm certainly willing to contribute my mathematical genius (or at least degree) to any study, etc.
Do I understand this argument correctly? Some of you (realists, I'd label them) are saying "downloading content for free is hurting AND HELPING the industry. Hopefully, the adult industry can find a way to change their business plan to survive the loss in revenue."
The other side (let's label them "Nostalgists who didn't know how good they had it in 1996.") have the Gene Simmons attitude: "String them up by their balls. Free downloading of movies, music, porn, etc. is worse than murder and child molestation COMBINED. If we arrested or heavily fined EVERY illegal downloader then things would go back to the 'way things were.' When we all could afford our mortgage payments."
Is that basically it? The two sides of it?

[Link]

ninja1
Senior Member

2939 Posts
1/08

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 12:25PM

No. It's more complex than that.

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11018 Posts
5/01

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 2:06PM

No my stance is that it is equivalent of shoplifting.
It's different than cell phones and pagers. When cell phones came people didn't turn around and start rampantly stealing them. What's going on here is that people have chosen to steal when a variety of options are available. DVD, VOD, rental, etc. The options the thieves want are available, they just cost money. And mostly instead of putting in security guards to cut down on the theft society as deemed it okay and is leaving locks off the store doors.
And no I want more effort to go to catching child porn and murder. The reason I had brought up the LAPD murder conviction rate was people in the thread have seemed to have made the connection that you can't stop all illegal downloading so it isn't worth it to stop any. I was curious how that worked with other crimes.
Of course maybe the people who chose to steal their entertainment will win. Studios will find a way to make money even though their consumers are just going to steal their product. They could go with CGI advertisements. For instance, they could put a CGI tattoo of the words "Drink Pepsi" on the cock as it's fucking. And add a CGI tattoo for Vagisil above the pussy. No one will like it and those that steal their entertainment would I'm sure join in with those who pay condemning the act however at least the studio would make money off the endorsements.

[Link]

killbillvol69

All-Star Member

^Lucy Pinder
18634 Posts
4/08

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 3:37PM

NewRomancer, I believe you've misunderstood the point of my post. Unlike many people here, I wasn't arguing with you. In order for an argument to be ad hominem, it has to be an argument in the first place.
I also was not insulting you or criticizing your character, which is what makes an argument become ad hominem.
What I was doing was just trying to help you out a bit, in explaining that the way you were presenting yourself to others was perhaps making you seem coy, cocky and arrogant. In no way did I imply that you actually are these things.
In fact, if I thought you were any of these things, it would have made no sense to point it out to you. Instead, I pointed it out expressly because I assumed you are not coy, cocky or arrogant, and that you perhaps didn't realize you were coming across this way. That's all.
I was just trying to help you argue more effectively.
I apologize for making you think I was trying to insult you or criticize your personality.
I do, however, still stand by my claim that in any situation, if someone asks for something that they know does not exist, they will indeed look coy, cocky and arrogant.
(By the way, I noticed that you did stop doing this after my posts; maybe it was because of me, and maybe not. Either way, I was happy to see you change your approach to one that seems more effective.)

[Link]

ninja1
Senior Member

2939 Posts
1/08

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 3:41PM

Options, yes. But still there is a sizeable alienated population.
1. Underage people or without I.D.
2. People w/o a CreditCard
3. People who live in "do not ship" zipcodes
4. People who have no local pornshop
5. People who live a "cash only" lifestyle
(Of course there is overlap/intertwine among the above)
I'm not saying that all these people would necessarily become buyers if these barriers were suddenly eliminated, but some probably would buy more than they are buying today. More money coming in. That's the real bottom line, right?

[Link]

NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 4:07PM

"In no way did I imply that you actually are these things."
I apologise if I seemed to be DENYING that I wasn't those thing! LOL
And worse!

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11018 Posts
5/01

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 5:33PM

A lot of these problems though aren't fixable on a whole. If you live in a do not ship zip code chances are you don't have a local porn shop. People who don't have ID have made their own problem. Everywhere I have lived you can get a non-drivers ID card which can be used for porn, beer, cigarettes, etc. Underage is a whole different problem that no fix will ever solve for porn. If you don't have a credit card, debit cards are available through banks to solve that problem. Some people will also have to accept that choices they make may limit their options. For instance someone who chooses not to have a bank account or credit card, they have also decided they can't shop online. It's insane for them to believe that companies have to adjust to their choice. Since they made the choice, they can go to the local porn store to buy. I also suspect that this list makes up the minimum of the illegal downloading. I think, but could be wrong, that the majority of illegal downloaders just don't want to pay for something if they can find a way not to. And several of go away when dealing with mainstream material yet they are having just as much of a problem on that side as well.
That problem isn't limited to just the internet. I can't tell you how many times in recent years I have been stuck behind someone in line where a manager has to get involved because a customer is irate because they collected enough coupons that not only should the item be free in their opinion but they are supposed to get money back from the store. It doesn't matter that it says one coupon per customer or not valid for over the store price.

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11018 Posts
5/01

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 5:36PM

And how it is placed without permission of the property owner. I've had to clean up these colored portions of the cityscape when people have decided to adorn where I have lived with it, without my or the landlord's permission. Maybe if the artists got permission from the property owner, or city where the city is the owner, they wouldn't be treated the same way.

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11018 Posts
5/01

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 5:47PM

I can't prove that gravity truly exists everywhere on the surface of Earth without having it tested everywhere. A reasonable person will accept that it exists everywhere on the surface of the Earth but due to some anomaly there could be a small area where it doesn't. Just as a reasonable person should find it hard to believe that out of all the illegal downloads not one would equal a rental. Of course when I read people posting elsewhere that they feel it is their right to illegally download a movie to decide whether they should purchase it it has been proven to me that that would have equaled a rental and therefore there is harm.
And I am willing to concede that if we have reached the point where none would equal at minimum a rental and we have become a society of thieves then maybe we are better off if all the entertainment companies went out of business. Maybe in 25 years after people realize how much they missed that kind of entertainment they would be willing to pay for it again.

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11018 Posts
5/01

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 6:37PM

I feel like I should add that at this point the studios are starting to become part of the problem as well. Not in the ways mentioned in this thread, but by not trying to shut down illegal file sharing systems or prosecute illegal downloaders. I know that some companies have taken steps to stop this practice but not enough have and none of them, adult or mainstream, are getting it into the news. If studios allow it to continue to look like a crime that they don't care about by lack of arrests/prosecutions then I suspect it will continue to skyrocket.

[Link]

nateglass
Member

I must break you
201 Posts
12/05

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 11:41PM

The fucked up thing (and I swear I don't think ANYONE on this board is understanding it) is that there are people WITHIN this industry that are profiting from the copyright infringement. There are STUDIOS (Penthouse, Bang, Brazzers) that own tube sites that contain content they don't own. Those studios are making major bank off of content that IS NOT THEIRS. There are also companies that are subsidizing piracy by paying ILLEGAL tube sites for advertising space (Brazzers, Penthouse by way of Adult Friend Finder).
That's my beef. Downloaders will be there always...we can't stop that...but those torrent and tube sites couldn't stay in business without advertising revenue, and THAT IS EXACTLY WHERE THE INDUSTRY NEEDS TO START LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.
Downloading is great...but if someone is going to make money by operating a tube site...they should do it by using content they either OWN or have LEGALLY LICENSED.
Does anyone get this, or am I just banging my head against the wall?

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11018 Posts
5/01

Posted - Sep 14 2008 : 11:57PM

Nate, that's not right either. I can't believe that other industry companies haven't come down on the ones in the industry doing this.

[Link]

BlackSix

All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 2:50AM

Why?

[Link]

BlackSix

All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
12377 Posts
9/07

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 2:54AM

I don't see how you can compare graffitti to downloading. Is downloading an artform? To clarify, by vandalism I meant things like breaking windows, how is that like graffitti and how does it lead to un-brainwashing citizens?

[Link]

Gunzo
Senior Member

1377 Posts
2/05

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 4:35AM

When graffitti is on 'illegal' surfaces it's not an artform, it's just vandalism. I could dress up like a clown and throw glass animals through windows and call it art, but it would still be vandalism if I didn't have permission, no matter how great the art.
When it comes to distribution via the internet, the big companies lost a lot of their power as selectors. They used to have more brainwashing power. And making people think is dangerous for the entire community, especially when there's very little money involved. Organized crime is bad, but people not believing in money is even worse, because after all money is the foundation of our socitety.

[Link]

NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 10:19AM

"but those torrent and tube sites couldn't stay in business without advertising revenue, and THAT IS EXACTLY WHERE THE INDUSTRY NEEDS TO START LEGAL PROCEEDINGS."
They'd probably get better results if they owned the torrent sites themselves, and generated $$ from other peoples adds...
See... I'd call that using the current system to ones advantage.

[Link]

nateglass
Member

I must break you
201 Posts
12/05

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 11:30AM

Oh yeah...can't beat those illegally profiting off others works...then JOIN those in illegally profiting off of others works.
Brilliant man!
I choose.....BUSINESS ETHICS - Billy Madison

[Link]

NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 1:09PM

"BUSINESS ETHICS"
Ha! Like Military Intelligence, Postal Service or Civil War....
The market has changed, and will continue to change... and those that change WITH it will survive, and those that don't will fail and vanish.
One will NEVER plug all the holes in distribution. And the internet will only ever serve to widen them.
Sell your dvds in a brick&mortar store... some people will buy them there
Sell your movies, whole, or scene by scene from online stores... some people will buy them there
Give your movies away through a torrent site YOU own, and collect revenue generated by adds on that site, and you'll make money off people getting your movie for free... You might even make more there than from the b&m or online stores...

[Link]

juha
Senior Member

2752 Posts
3/05

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 3:14PM

The torrent users aren't a very attractive market segment.
Why should any company advertise a product to users who aren't potential buyers?
Torrent users want it all and they want it all for free.
No market for advertisement.
Edited by - juha on 9/15/2008 3:15:36 PM

[Link]

NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 3:31PM

I'll be happy to discuss your points, after you've discussed mine.
Or is being "done with me" a one way street?

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11018 Posts
5/01

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 4:39PM

Why bother, you have attested to time and time again that illegal downloading doesn't cause harm. So why keep these avenues open. By your logic, everyone can download off a torrent site for free without causing harm so these avenues must not be actually making money.

And what is to entice the people to come to each companies site. You haven't stopped the large filesharing sites that have movies from all companies. So now each company will have to come up with a gimmick to get downloaders to go to multiple sites to get what they can at one. Should they advertise on the illegal sites? Come download the movie you are currently downloading at ours. That's a real catcher. Maybe they should start paying the people to come and download for free off the official site. No matter what they do to make the file nicer by your own statements here it will show up on the illegal sites. And the actual companies still have a massive barrier. The cost to create the material and get it up on the web. The illegal sites just have to keep the computers running. People come and put up the material for them and no one involved has paid a dime to create the material. It seems under your ideal internet world the only way to make money would be for all the studios to shutdown and just steal each others material and make whatever they can off of the advertising.

[Link]

NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 4:49PM

"So why keep these avenues open."
I'm not the one trying to suggest, without any evidence, that they are in any trouble in the first place....
"You haven't stopped the large filesharing sites that have movies from all companies."
Of course not.... It's pointless to even try cause they're NEVER going away.
When you can't beat 'em, suck 'em... no! JOIN 'em!
USE the torrent sites to make $$ off the so-called 'pirates'.

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11018 Posts
5/01

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 5:17PM

How, if the studios give away their movies there is no longer a reason to buy the DVD. Then it will be legal to download their titles for free. Why would I or anyone else now buy a DVD when it is now perfectly legal to download it. Why would anyone buy VOD, it's now free and legal. And more than that as you have ascertained previously over and over and over again since there is no acceptable proof of harm from illegal downloading so if everyone who currently purchases DVD choose to start downloading for free nothing has been harmed.

[Link]

NewRomancer
Deactivated User

under THEIR avatar
738 Posts
7/08

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 5:39PM

Asked and answered.

[Link]

Flash

Golden Age Classic

11018 Posts
5/01

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 6:45PM

No you haven't answered. You are just saying join them yet you offer no logistics on how it would actually work to benefit the companies. Especially since you have now destroyed DVD and VOD money they were making. Prove to me how your statements would work to make the companies at least the amount of money they are making now. You claim to want to discuss points. You claim that you aren't just a thief trying to justify why illegal downloads aren't wrong. I'm trying to give you a chance to explain how this would work. So please do so.

[Link]

ninja1
Senior Member

2939 Posts
1/08

Posted - Sep 15 2008 : 7:22PM

I think he is just piggybacking on whomever said the tube/torrent sites are making a ton of money from ad revenues. If you set up your own tube/torrent site, you could be similarly pocketing a similar ton of money from ad revenues. If you were some big-time studio, you will have access to millions of hours of free(to you) porn to lure the users to your site. Luring more users = more advertising $$.
That's how it works. I think.

[Link]