Do you know about the new legislation on free internet, SOPA

[svenkateshsmart]

Friends,

Just a few hours ago found that the wikipedia is down to express their protest against the Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect IP Act, SOPA and PIPA respectively.

More information on the impact of these legislations are available here:
SOPA, PIPA: What you need to know - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

 

[svenkateshsmart]

Friends,

Megaupload.com has been banned on the grounds of copyright infringement, criminal copyright infringement by FBI and US Federal IPR agencies!!!!!

We have more to follow.........

Try http://www.megaupload.com/ and you can see the notice being posted here!

Bells are ringing!! So, let us also take extreme care with copyrighted contents and the like!

 

[Moviela]

US legislators got more than an earful from people against the legislation. So much so that leaders have withdrawn the bill from voting in congress.

As a content producer I do feel that piracy is a problem. The solution is not to deny freedom of people that are not involved in the piracy.

Just as the world came together to deal with pirates on the high seas, there needs to be a consensus that digital pirates should have no safe heaven.

There is a cost to everyone for the file sharing that goes on the Internet now. That is the use of bandwidth for distributing pirated feature films. Everyone who pays for Internet access pays the bill for this.

I have no argument with a Grandma who buys a Blu-ray of Winnie the Pooh in Chennai and sends it digitally to grandkids in New Delhi (what was wrong with old Delhi that they needed a new one?), however, I would not want her to share it with everyone's grandkids.

The answer is not to deny people their right to use the Internet. The solution should lie with laws that allow police to do their job and stop the pirates.

There needs to be some adjustment to the penalties too. Currently if you download Michael Jackson's music you can be jailed for five years. If you kill Michael Jackson you get four years in jail. A fine of Rs 5000 might be more just for people downloading content.

My own industry could stop a lot of the piracy by pricing it reasonable enough that people would not steal it. If it was Rs 50 to download Mission Impossible, who would waste time looking for a torrent?

 

[matbhuvi]

Currently if you download Michael Jackson's music you can be jailed for five years. If you kill Michael Jackson you get four years in jail.

:lol: well said

 

[doors666]

Another issue is the way the companies keep conning people. where was the logic in bringing lotr trilogy normal edition first and then extended edition bluray later. such people should be imprisoned for conning people. it should not be tolerated under the guise of marketing or capitalism. if this is ok, then what wrong has megaupload team done, they are also capitalists, who saw a way to make a quick buck, they dont do anything illegal, just provide infrastructure for people to upload/download.

Then there are numerous editions, directors cuts, golden/platinum, digitally remastered blah blah blah. how many of us own multiple copies of the same shit again and again. All con jobs. Modifying a movie by 5% doesnt make it new intellectual property. Once u own one, u should be legally allowed to own them all without paying again.

Once you have purchased a source, you should be entitled to own a copy of that in any format. once i purchase a vcd, i should have a right to own a vcd/dvd/bluray/720p/1080p copy of the same video, whether downloaded or not as I have already paid for the movie. If the company now goes and extracts more video resolution from analog reels and sell it on a shinier platter is their freakin' problem.

In this digital age, they should be selling proof/certificate of purchase for a music/movie/book etc. whether mp3/flac, bluray/dvd/download should become irrelevant. I should goto a planetM with a pen drive and purchase whatever format etc.

There are cds that I have purchased 4-5 times because cd went bad/lost/scratched etc. There should not be a need to purchase these more than once.

And then of course there is the issue of cost. And I am not only talking about the cost of blurays. What about when you goto a movie theater and get conned by paying 100 bucks for bloody 5 ruppes worth of pop corns or 100 bucks for a pepsi.

If all thats ok, then its also ok for a person to buy a movie from roadside for 50 bucks. He's not a pirate but a victim of piracy.

In today's world, most the people see it this way- the companies are out there to screw me, its better that i screw them first.:lol:

 

[venkatcr]

Once you have purchased a source, you should be entitled to own a copy of that in any format. once i purchase a vcd, i should have a right to own a vcd/dvd/bluray/720p/1080p copy of the same video, whether downloaded or not as I have already paid for the movie. If the company now goes and extracts more video resolution from analog reels and sell it on a shinier platter is their freakin' problem.

In this digital age, they should be selling proof/certificate of purchase for a music/movie/book etc. whether mp3/flac, bluray/dvd/download should become irrelevant. I should goto a planetM with a pen drive and purchase whatever format etc.

Most of your statements seems to be in frustration and not logical. Nobody is forcing you to buy anything. But a producer who spends a million dollars making a movie does not want to see come Chinese in HK making millions for himself by just copying. And when you talk about different formats there is the cost of production which you seem to forget. Even assuming you are ready to pay for that, keeping track of purchase information for something like 10$ is immensely cost prohibitive.

There are cds that I have purchased 4-5 times because cd went bad/lost/scratched etc. There should not be a need to purchase these more than once.

And how is a producer responsible for your mistakes? It is like saying I bought a shirt, it is torn, so give me a new one. Wear and tear is valid for everything including media. Wear and tear is not there for few things such as software, and there many of them can be used for life, and some have an annual plan. Why? Because every new version that is bought out has some additional work put in.

And then of course there is the issue of cost. And I am not only talking about the cost of blurays. What about when you goto a movie theater and get conned by paying 100 bucks for bloody 5 ruppes worth of pop corns or 100 bucks for a pepsi.

You buy Pepsi or popcorn from a roadside shop, you will get it cheaper. You go to a plush restaurant with deep carpets and air conditioners, you will get it at that price only. There is different between a road side shop that costs 10,000 to set up, and a plush theater that costs a couple of crores.

You cannot go into a 5 star hotel and demand a plate of dal be given at 10 bucks.

If all thats ok, then its also ok for a person to buy a movie from roadside for 50 bucks. He's not a pirate but a victim of piracy.

In today's world, most the people see it this way- the companies are out there to screw me, its better that i screw them first.:lol:

This is immoral and illegal. The company that makes a movie has the right to own it and do what with it. You have no rights other than what is given to you as a user. How would you like it if a jopdi wala says why is this living in such a nice house, throws you out, and occupies your house? What you are saying is very close to that.

Cheers

 

[doors666]

Most of your statements seems to be in frustration and not logical. Nobody is forcing you to buy anything. But a producer who spends a million dollars making a movie does not want to see come Chinese in HK making millions for himself by just copying. And when you talk about different formats there is the cost of production which you seem to forget. Even assuming you are ready to pay for that, keeping track of purchase information for something like 10$ is immensely cost prohibitive.

there is no need to keep track of anything. the onus of providing proof of purchase will be with the owner.
there was absolutely no need to release lotr standard release on bluray. it was just to make more cash and nothing else. while it was legally right, it wasnt ethically right.

Edit: Even cigarette companies, drug dealers, arms manufacturers/dealers/illegal sellers use the same logic - no body is forcing you to buy it. Some are legal, some are not, doesnt make their trade ethical.

And how is a producer responsible for your mistakes? It is like saying I bought a shirt, it is torn, so give me a new one. Wear and tear is valid for everything including media. Wear and tear is not there for few things such as software, and there many of them can be used for life, and some have an annual plan. Why? Because every new version that is bought out has some additional work put in.

point is if they are selling proof of purchase, i can make a backup.
even a shirt maker doesnt prevent you from copying the shirt.

You buy Pepsi or popcorn from a roadside shop, you will get it cheaper. You go to a plush restaurant with deep carpets and air conditioners, you will get it at that price only. There is different between a road side shop that costs 10,000 to set up, and a plush theater that costs a couple of crores.

You cannot go into a 5 star hotel and demand a plate of dal be given at 10 bucks.
This is immoral and illegal. The company that makes a movie has the right to own it and do what with it. You have no rights other than what is given to you as a user. How would you like it if a jopdi wala says why is this living in such a nice house, throws you out, and occupies your house? What you are saying is very close to that.

Cheers

point is, movie industry needs to do some introspection as to why piracy is rampant and take steps to make prices, convenience etc more rational. They should stop this practise of recharging the same set of customers again and again for the same product repackaged in a new shape/format.

If movie tickets/food there was more affordable, the shows wont be running empty so much and they will end up making more profits actually. For a standar family of four, it becomes more than a grand extravaganza to go see a movie. if it was lesser, the same family will end up seeing more movies and actually spend more than what they spend now.

 

[ajay124]

I don't mind paying 90 INR for a 'silver' ticket in a multiplex but a price of 200 INR for a 3D film is a bit too much. Unfortunately most Hollywood films for children are being released with only the 3D version. Accompanying my daughter to see a new Walt Disney film means spending 400 bucks on two tickets. 200 more on popcorns and coke for her and a coffee for me. Followed by pizzas at the food court. It is far more economical to buy her discounted VCD's and DVD's for 50-100 bucks.

 

[jaudere]

May be I should thank the law makers that once I buy a CD, I don't have to pay each time I listen to the same song.

About cheap Rs. 50 VCD/DVD. I don't think people who buy a 35k+ TV for the PQ would be interested in these CDs which give very poor PQ with a lot of pixelation and hopeless sound.
I usually rather wait for an year or two when the second batch of original VCD/DVD comes out with VCD at around Rs 100 and DVD around 300. What is the difference if I see a movie later by year or two?


I had a query about the issue of buying CDs again and again, one could rather copy the music on PC (without sharing that with anyone). Then one uses CD again and again. When it is damaged, one can burn a new CD with stored data but retain the original scratched CD as a proof of purchase/Ownership.Now is this legal or no?

 

[Kannan_madhu]

One of the main reason for people buy pirated stuff is the exorbitant price charged by the studios for DVDs and Brays , there used to be a time of high movie piracy where you could get the so called theater prints in no time after release of Malayalam movies in Kerala but now things have changed ,people are buying original DVD released by moserbear and other companies . There are two things behind this change people don't want to watch those crappy prints while they get original DVDs for a bit more (less than 100 rupees even many combo dvds available for rs50).
Right now i prefer to spend rupees 50( those multiplex have not invaded my small city) and see those flicks in 70mm screen with digital surround equipment costing lakhs than my 32inch LCDs built in speakers

 

[ranjeetrain]

One of the main reason for people buy pirated stuff is the exorbitant price charged by the studios for DVDs and Brays

I don't support piracy and prefer to buy my stuff, but I share that notion.

Consider this: In USA you will pay USD 5-20 for a CD/DVD/DVD-A/SACD/BD. In China you will pay CNY 10-25. All these prices are the price of a burger/sandwich. In India to buy an original CD/DVD/DVD-A/SACD/BD with high quality build and engineering at 4-10 times the equivalent price. If these items were available in India at same relative affordability, piracy would be a lot less. Many people steal because it's easy to steal software, there is very little chance to get caught and it doesn't feel so immoral. If all these factors were not true, there will be much less piracy.

Scale of economies! Companies like T-Series and Moser Baer can produce and sell CDs/DVDs at INR 50, why can't Sony/BMG/EMI/Venus do that? Okay, they have higher level of quality and engineering, granted, so lets put a premium. Make it 20-25% costlier. But 4-10 times the cost? Now that's asking to be pirated.

 

[Santy]

Increase the volumes by decreasing the cost of original media. Same with multiplexes. I often find myself with less than a dozen people sitting with me on the fourth day in a cinema charged at 180. Sheer waste of resources. If they reduce the charges by 50%, they can increase the sales by 400%.

Low cost, high volumes. The Ambani way. Capt. Gopinath's way.This is the ideal if not the best way to curb piracy.

 

[just4kix]

I agree with the point that CD/DVD/BD are priced exhorbitantly. To some extent, I understand about Audio CD. They are not mass released like movies and watched by millions. An artist's album does not make as much money as the movies - at least not always.

But movies are released in thousands of cinemas worldwide. They make millions in the first three months. Then a DVD/BD is released. These are typically prices from $15 to $30 in retail. The high cost invites piracy. Since most of the movies have already recovered a cost and mad a decent profit as well, why can't the discs be sold at $5 to $10?

But as far as closing megaupload.com is concerned, I feel that move is fully justified. Megaupload was making tons of money out of copyright infringement and digital piracy. Here are some excerpts from http://www.firstpost.com/tech/anti-...-raid-megaupload-founders-mansion-189727.html

With 150 million registered users, about 50 million hits daily and endorsements from music superstars, Megaupload.com was among the worlds biggest file-sharing sites.

Police spokesman Grant Ogilvie said the seized cars include a Rolls Royce Phantom Drophead Coupe worth more than $400,000 as well as several Mercedes. Two short-barreled shotguns and a number of valuable artworks were also confiscated, he added.

Megaupload is considered a cyberlocker, in which users can upload and transfer files that are too large to send by email. Such sites can have perfectly legitimate uses. But the Motion Picture Association of America estimated that the vast majority of content being shared on Megaupload was in violation of copyright laws.

The website allowed users to download some content for free, but made money by charging subscriptions to people who wanted access to faster download speeds or extra content. The website also sold advertising.

The five-count indictment, which alleges copyright infringement as well as conspiracy to commit money laundering and racketeering, described a site designed specifically to reward users who uploaded pirated content for sharing, and turned a blind eye to requests from copyright holders to remove copyright-protected files.

For instance, users received cash bonuses if they uploaded content popular enough to generate massive numbers of downloads, according to the indictment. Such content was almost always copyright protected, the indictment said.

Regarding cinemas and theaters overcharging on price items, insanely priced tickets, attrocious parking charges, etc., I fully agree. If you go abroad, parking is free, food items are charged the same as what a typical fast-food restaurant would charge, etc. Ticket prices are a bit expensive though (typically $6 to $10 depending upon the city/town).

That is why, I rarely go to the movies now, at least, in India.

 

[venkatcr]

Regarding cinemas and theaters overcharging on price items, insanely priced tickets, attrocious parking charges, etc., I fully agree. If you go abroad, parking is free, food items are charged the same as what a typical fast-food restaurant would charge, etc. Ticket prices are a bit expensive though (typically $6 to $10 depending upon the city/town).

That is why, I rarely go to the movies now, at least, in India.

Everything is related to cost. In India, if you want to construct 2000 seater in the heart of the city, it will cost you 10 crores? And there are running costs. How is one supposed to recover that. Remember, we are a small percentage. 90% of the Indian population do not have a HT or even a DVD player. And they do see movies. There are halls that have different prices.

Cheers

 

[just4kix]

Hmm. I am not arguing. But, don't you think that cost of construction is equally high, say in San Francisco or London or Manchester? Perhaps even more? I never feel cheated there.

But over here, the problem I see is that everybody wants to recover money/cost in one year. The problem is of governance. There is no sticker price attached to, say, a plate of samosa. So I can charge whatever I like. Malls are doing the same thing with apparel, especially items such as T-shirts, where there is no MRP sticker. The other day, I went Central Mall in Pune. A very ordinary hosiery T-shirt (round neck) with some words printed on it was priced at Rs. 600-800. Looking at the quality, I would swear that it would not have lasted four machine cycles.

Since the theater screens everything and does not allow to carry even my own water (in the name of security), I am forced to buy overinflated priced eatables in the official cafeteria. This is what irks me.

 

[Santy]

Everything is related to cost. In India, if you want to construct 2000 seater in the heart of the city, it will cost you 10 crores? And there are running costs. How is one supposed to recover that.

How can they recover with 10 to 20% occupancy (even for above average movies) ? Why not reduce the rates and run at 80%.

Forget Samosas, they charge bottled drinking water at 2 to 3 times the normal rate (they get them specially made without mrp printed on it). Even some of the best multiplexes keep water closet near the toilet, without disposable cups to dissuade people from drinking it and forced to buy at high cost.



Sent from my GT-I9001 using Tapatalk

 

[krishnenduk]

Today famous filesharing site filesonic also shuts down.. Their is showing a message,

"All sharing functionality on FileSonic is now disabled. Our service can only be used to upload and retrieve files that you have uploaded personally.

If this file belongs to you, please login to download it directly from your file manager."

 

[Moviela]

I read some opinions that media companies are somehow charging too much for their products, and that classical economics of supply and demand are being ignored by exhibitors.

Let me throw some cold water on those ideas. All movies do not make make money in theatrical release. Half never make a profit. Movie companies do not make most of their money in theaters. 70 percent of a films income typically comes from other income sources than theaters. Rs 200 for 3D ticket for Cars 2 is barely enough to cover the cost of the eyewear. US audiences pay a $3 premium for a 3D film, bringing the total to $12 to $15.

Theater owners worldwide are facing huge costs and in practice the money they receive from tickets only covers the cost of the building. The popcorn and drinks are priced higher than outside to cover costs from staff, electricty, projection equipment, and a thin profit.

Careful experiments and reading of data shows that a cheaper ticket will not increase profits by bringing more patrons. Lowering the price seems to alert movie goers that the theater is somehow not as good as ones that charge more. Lowering the price does attract a few people who then refuse to purchase a snack, thus the exhibitor has wear and tear on the property, but nothing to keep his wife happy.

The vast majority of patrons are 18 to 25 years old that want to sped a few hours in the dark with a member of the opposite sex. If you go mid-week, early, you will often find an empty house. That is because the prime demographic is working to earn the money for a couple of tickets.

It is not common practice to show a film only in 3D. Many people experience headaches or fatigue from 3D films. Multiplexes usually have a flat screen, or at least some screenings that are shown flat. I always keep a few pair of glasses that have a left eye filter in the left and right frames. A sensitive person can wear these in a 3D presentation and the left eye image will appear in both of their eyes, and look flat.

In the home market, the sales of music CD's is much more than film sales. Most people rent movies, where they buy music.

I have no complaint with companies selling the same film in different formats. Time marches on, and technical improvements have increased the quality and size of the image in my living room. VHS tapes that looked so good on my 25 inch CRT look like the output of the North end of a South bound cow on my new Panasonic ST30.

I do think that the cost of watching the film at home is expensive for collectors, but the average family that rents the film gets an incredible value.

 

[sound1]

Guys,

Do you know if anyone in India has been booked for online piracy?
And are the US anti-piracy laws like ACTA/SOPA/PIPA/DCMA etc. are enforceable in India and may end up in extradition?

 

[svenkateshsmart]

Guys,

Do you know if anyone in India has been booked for online piracy?
And are the US anti-piracy laws like ACTA/SOPA/PIPA/DCMA etc. are enforceable in India and may end up in extradition?

Not sure about your first question, though there have been talks on censorship of controversial topics over the web?

Yes, these laws are enforceable around the world, e.g., if "Music Company A" has ownership of an album and which finds that website B is giving it for free, the Music Company A can ask any search engine to make it unavailable in search results, hold the file sharing website for involving in conspiracy and eventually ban the website.

Cheers!