The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Upwire news article:
"Comical images of cutlass brandishing, peg-legged, one-eyed scoundrels trying to flog you a dodgy copy of Finding Nemo with a hand-drawn cover aside, DVD pirating is a rather prominent and serious issue at the moment. Apparently illegally copied DVDs are costing the industry millions in lost revenue, mainly through DVDs being ripped onto computer and made available on the internet.
The copy protection firm Macrovision have developed a new weapon in the battle against the pirates - 'RipGuard' technology. It's basically a patch that blocks DVD ripper software from getting past the code that usually scrambles DVD contents. It can be applied to discs to make them much more difficult to hack and therefore nearly impossible to rip on to a computer.
Slightly dubious is the fact that RipGuard won't be able to prevent all hackers from passing the scramble code, just most of them. Presumably this means RipGuard can be hacked, and the methods for doing so may well be propagated through shady cyber taverns fairly soon after its introduction.
Still, hats off to Macrovision who plan to regularly update RipGuard to keep the hackers at bay, the news will certainly please Hollywood execs and those in the DVD business who are feeling pretty hacked off (ha-de ha ha) by piracy."
So piracy is obviously affecting the movie industry and costing them millions. And it seems that they are still strongly taking action against piracy and Macrovision's new RipGuard will put some piracy on hold for a while.
Should the industry be spending all this money on preventing piracy, or should they just step aside and let it happen? At the moment they obviously are trying their best to prevent it, and it's not just the movie industry.
Nintendo and THQ are also very keen to prevent it. THQ commented on the matter when a man complained about a pirated version of Monsters inc, by saying; "We are working with the appropriate authorities to investigate and prosecute parties responsible for this unfortunate incident to the fullest extent of the law."
Nintendo have also commented on piracy by saying; "Nintendo won't tolerate these illegal products, and is grateful to it's devoted costomers. We will aggressively protect the quality and integrity of the video game products are fans are so loyal to." - Jodi Daugherty, director of anti-piracy.
So almost every industry, especialy the movie industry are all very keen to prevent piracy, probably more than ever. But still doing everything they can to prevent it, it's unlikly that it will stop all together anytime soon. So do you think they should step aside, or should they spend more money to bring piracy to an end all together?
"Comical images of cutlass brandishing, peg-legged, one-eyed scoundrels trying to flog you a dodgy copy of Finding Nemo with a hand-drawn cover aside, DVD pirating is a rather prominent and serious issue at the moment. Apparently illegally copied DVDs are costing the industry millions in lost revenue, mainly through DVDs being ripped onto computer and made available on the internet.
The copy protection firm Macrovision have developed a new weapon in the battle against the pirates - 'RipGuard' technology. It's basically a patch that blocks DVD ripper software from getting past the code that usually scrambles DVD contents. It can be applied to discs to make them much more difficult to hack and therefore nearly impossible to rip on to a computer.
Slightly dubious is the fact that RipGuard won't be able to prevent all hackers from passing the scramble code, just most of them. Presumably this means RipGuard can be hacked, and the methods for doing so may well be propagated through shady cyber taverns fairly soon after its introduction.
Still, hats off to Macrovision who plan to regularly update RipGuard to keep the hackers at bay, the news will certainly please Hollywood execs and those in the DVD business who are feeling pretty hacked off (ha-de ha ha) by piracy."
So piracy is obviously affecting the movie industry and costing them millions. And it seems that they are still strongly taking action against piracy and Macrovision's new RipGuard will put some piracy on hold for a while.
Should the industry be spending all this money on preventing piracy, or should they just step aside and let it happen? At the moment they obviously are trying their best to prevent it, and it's not just the movie industry.
Nintendo and THQ are also very keen to prevent it. THQ commented on the matter when a man complained about a pirated version of Monsters inc, by saying; "We are working with the appropriate authorities to investigate and prosecute parties responsible for this unfortunate incident to the fullest extent of the law."
Nintendo have also commented on piracy by saying; "Nintendo won't tolerate these illegal products, and is grateful to it's devoted costomers. We will aggressively protect the quality and integrity of the video game products are fans are so loyal to." - Jodi Daugherty, director of anti-piracy.
So almost every industry, especialy the movie industry are all very keen to prevent piracy, probably more than ever. But still doing everything they can to prevent it, it's unlikly that it will stop all together anytime soon. So do you think they should step aside, or should they spend more money to bring piracy to an end all together?
Page:
Rickoss wrote:
> If I didn't download music I'd have a lot less albums than I do. I
> don't see the harm in downloading a couple of tracks to see what an
> album's like, then deciding whether or not I'm going to buy the album
> or not. I download a lot of b-sides/live stuff too, which may
> technically be illegal, but it's the only way I can get to hear the
> stuff, so it's not really harming anyone.
>
> I don't like the idea of people downloading full albums though, if
> you like a band/musician, the least you can do is pay
> £5-£10 for an album.
>
> But meh.
Exactly what I was getting at. I never download albums, just singles.
> If I didn't download music I'd have a lot less albums than I do. I
> don't see the harm in downloading a couple of tracks to see what an
> album's like, then deciding whether or not I'm going to buy the album
> or not. I download a lot of b-sides/live stuff too, which may
> technically be illegal, but it's the only way I can get to hear the
> stuff, so it's not really harming anyone.
>
> I don't like the idea of people downloading full albums though, if
> you like a band/musician, the least you can do is pay
> £5-£10 for an album.
>
> But meh.
Exactly what I was getting at. I never download albums, just singles.
Iv'e been pwnd.
Towards Pandaemonium this is.
Towards Pandaemonium this is.
If I didn't download music I'd have a lot less albums than I do. I don't see the harm in downloading a couple of tracks to see what an album's like, then deciding whether or not I'm going to buy the album or not. I download a lot of b-sides/live stuff too, which may technically be illegal, but it's the only way I can get to hear the stuff, so it's not really harming anyone.
I don't like the idea of people downloading full albums though, if you like a band/musician, the least you can do is pay £5-£10 for an album.
But meh.
I don't like the idea of people downloading full albums though, if you like a band/musician, the least you can do is pay £5-£10 for an album.
But meh.
The only reason I'd watch a pirate film is if it's one that I deem 'crap' and an insult to cinema-goers. Van Helsing, for instance - no way was I going to pay to watch that mind-dump of a movie, but I took the time out to watch a pirated copy. The director, actors, and everyone involved should be grateful, that I (reads 'anyone') took the time out to pass my critical eye over their art. I learnt my lesson after the girlfriend bought Pearl Harbour.
Another example: The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Watched it on pirate because it looked toss, found out it was really good (in my opinion), and bought it on DVD. New Beck album - downloaded an advance copy, loved it, ordered it straight away. It isn't out until April, but the powers-that-be have my money now, so why can't I have the album in a lower quality, untreated format? It's like a sampler.
With films the money is already made - budgets are approved beforehand, unions are involved - nobody goes without. Not many films open without expecting to make money back from the ticket sales - anything from DVDs and merchandise is a bonus. The film and music industry has enjoyed bumper years recently, yet they still complain that we aren't lining their pockets enough. That's just insane - they sound like spoilt children. Look at the major blockbusters that have $200 million budgets - how many of them are worth owning, let alone going to see once at the cinema?
Maybe we should expect an increase in the quality of films and music, before they can get the pay rises they don't need?
Another example: The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Watched it on pirate because it looked toss, found out it was really good (in my opinion), and bought it on DVD. New Beck album - downloaded an advance copy, loved it, ordered it straight away. It isn't out until April, but the powers-that-be have my money now, so why can't I have the album in a lower quality, untreated format? It's like a sampler.
With films the money is already made - budgets are approved beforehand, unions are involved - nobody goes without. Not many films open without expecting to make money back from the ticket sales - anything from DVDs and merchandise is a bonus. The film and music industry has enjoyed bumper years recently, yet they still complain that we aren't lining their pockets enough. That's just insane - they sound like spoilt children. Look at the major blockbusters that have $200 million budgets - how many of them are worth owning, let alone going to see once at the cinema?
Maybe we should expect an increase in the quality of films and music, before they can get the pay rises they don't need?
Bullup wrote:
> From the way he's speaking about piracy i'd guess he isn't.
"But most people now days have an mp3 player and don't buy any form of CD, because it's a lot cheaper to download. And there are a few legal sites, such as iTunes and Napster, but then again, there are a lot more ilegal ones as well, and it's those ones that are causing the damage."
Still, Could be wrong, but I get the inmpression he's paying for legal downloads, which in most cases are just over 50p a track (from what I've seen)
> From the way he's speaking about piracy i'd guess he isn't.
"But most people now days have an mp3 player and don't buy any form of CD, because it's a lot cheaper to download. And there are a few legal sites, such as iTunes and Napster, but then again, there are a lot more ilegal ones as well, and it's those ones that are causing the damage."
Still, Could be wrong, but I get the inmpression he's paying for legal downloads, which in most cases are just over 50p a track (from what I've seen)
From the way he's speaking about piracy i'd guess he isn't.
Bullup wrote:
> If you just download your not a music fan, you just abuse the
> industry.
Even considered he's buying mp3's?
> If you just download your not a music fan, you just abuse the
> industry.
Even considered he's buying mp3's?
Firestarter wrote:
> Edit - Infact, one of the reasons why I have become a much bigger
> music fan is because I can now afford a hell of a lot more music than
> I used to, because of my mp3 player.
If you just download your not a music fan, you just abuse the industry.
> Edit - Infact, one of the reasons why I have become a much bigger
> music fan is because I can now afford a hell of a lot more music than
> I used to, because of my mp3 player.
If you just download your not a music fan, you just abuse the industry.
Wardy_MoD wrote:
> I was in the cinema today seeing Hide and Seek and there was this old
> bloke sitting to our left with a movie camera making a pirate so
> every 5 minutes we shouted something out or made some noise just to
> ruin his copy.
Totally ruining the movie for everyone else hmmmmmm?
I'd have personally left, and informed the cinema staff. The camera would have been confiscated, the police would have been called and he'd probably have lost it. Not for any strong feelings towards people doing that, but just because, well, I'm a [fish just before it lays it's eggs].
I think you're telling porkies to be honest.
> I was in the cinema today seeing Hide and Seek and there was this old
> bloke sitting to our left with a movie camera making a pirate so
> every 5 minutes we shouted something out or made some noise just to
> ruin his copy.
Totally ruining the movie for everyone else hmmmmmm?
I'd have personally left, and informed the cinema staff. The camera would have been confiscated, the police would have been called and he'd probably have lost it. Not for any strong feelings towards people doing that, but just because, well, I'm a [fish just before it lays it's eggs].
I think you're telling porkies to be honest.
Anyway, me = off to bed, I am exceedingly tired for some reason tonight, but will disguss tomorrow.
Page: