Illegal Downloading

Right Turn Clyde

What are people's thoughts on downloading? I know there's some older posts dealing with this issue but where are we in 2016?

I quit it a few months ago but I never stopped purchasing physical media. In fact my policy has always been to buy DVDs/Blurays as often as possible and that continued even when my downloading was at its worst. However I found I was just starting to download stuff that I would have otherwise added to my collection and that told me it had become a problem for me personally (not to mention for the studios that I was ripping off).

I'm not trying to advocate downloading so I hope the Mods will give me an easy ride, but surely the one great advantage of downloading films is just how adventurous it allows you to be. I'd never have spent €20 on a silent movie or on someone like Bela Tarr because it all just sounded like hard work. However I now have a handsome collection of silent Blurays and Satantango just arrived in the post. Without doubt, downloading has helped me break down some monumental barriers in terms of my taste in films and has directly led to my spending more and more money on film.

I'm dead set on never downloading anything illegally again, but how long will that last I wonder? I'm jumping out of my skin at the thoughts of viewing Masaki Kobayashi's The Human Condition for the first time, but I'll have to buy a region free DVD player first and then pay roughly €50 to import the Criterion edition. On the other hand I could have it on my laptop for free within 40 minutes!

So that's the great internal debate I'm having. Of course the likes of Criterion deserve our support because what they do is fundamental to the preservation of classic film, but I'm a Kobayashi fan and I want to see that fcukin film now! I'll hold out for a UK release but it just seems so pointless waiting on something that might not arrive. And if I were to import the Criterion I'd be buying it second-hand so Criterion will never get my money either way, just some sweaty eBay prospector. Why am I doing this to myself?

Anyway, hopefully the Mods will let this run if everyone behaves sensibly. I'd really like to hear people's thoughts on their own internal struggles. Is there some standard that you hold yourself to or is viewing the film the most important thing and to hell with the ethics of the matter? Does my interest in the film and my love of the director trump any little moral reservation I might have?

goz83

I very rarely download movies and the ones I would stream are the ones out in the video shop, which I also rarely do. I used to visit the local xtra-vision in Donaghmede, but it closed a couple of years ago. The one in Sutton closed and the one in Coolock village too, so going to the video shop became a big issue. And yes, i am aware illegal downloading is a big part of this, which is why I limited it, mainly to movies I wouldn't rent, or buy, or stuff I had seen before.

My main streaming activity would be on TV series, so I figure they're aired on TV and I feel that's ok. I have purchased box sets for stuff I really like.

If I were in your shoes OP, I would send criterion a cheque and would download the movie. win/win

Chris_Bradley

The movie/music business had it's chance years ago to stop it by the people who developed Napster, they turned their noses to the chance to hook up and sort the issue out there & then.

They've only themselves to blame, they can't say anything to anyone about greed.

Right Turn Clyde

goz83 wrote: »

My main streaming activity would be on TV series, so I figure they're aired on TV and I feel that's ok.

That's interesting because if I missed an episode of one of my favourite TV shows I'd have no reservations about downloading it, yet I'm one of the people that you'll hear yapping on about a 'golden age of television'. I find these little distinctions and justifications very interesting.

I think if I really scrutinised my position re downloading films I wouldn't have a leg to stand on because I've no doubt I'm still breaking the law and taking advantage of artists in a dozen different ways.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

I don't download, but I do stream a lot. Legal (I have a netflix account) and illegal (let's face it - some things aren't on netflix!). If a movie is particularly good I will consider buying it, but that doesn't happen often.

I also stream a lot of stuff (especially tv series) that simply isn't available via any other means.

industrialhorse

Downloading, in its legal or illegal form, is a disruptive technology and it is here to stay. The firms that produce movies are not going to lose out since millions of people still love going to the cinema and box office to see the latest releases. Where the money will be lost is in the retail stores when movies are sold on DVD/Blu-Ray because by this time, the people who paid to see the movie at the cinema are most likely going to download because they dont want to pay to see it again, and those who download only will continue to download as ever. This is where the retail stores have failed to adapt to the change and are continuing to suffer as we see with the likes of HMV, ExtraVision, Blockbuster etc. Downloading is never going to go away and ISP's are kidding themselves if they think the way forward is to target individuals with cutting off internet access. Those who know how to use the internet to their own advantage or who at least have the cop on to look for the answer will continue to find ways around this and it is going to take a lot of consulting and head bashing for the big firms to come up with a long term solution or maybe a counter-disruptive technology of their own

Right Turn Clyde

Chris_Bradley wrote: »

The movie/music business had it's chance years ago to stop it with the people who developed Napster, they turned their noses to the chance to hook up and sort the issue out there & then.

They've only themselves to blame, they can't say anything to anyone about greed.

But that's coming at the issue in terms of the huge studios. What about smaller, independent producers and distributors that had no dog in that hunt?

Take Criterion for example. They do sterling work in terms of preserving and promoting film, but despite how big and popular they are they're still a relatively small outfit. Their releases are heavily downloaded, but they're marketed at collectors and collectors will always spend money on the genuine article. So that's their business model right there.

Criterion have also made a sizeable portion of their back catalogue available on Hulu and they're also involved in MUBI, occasionally making some of their releases available for stream on this side of the Atlantic. So Criterion have tried to change with the times. However, are we justified in downloading their releases because they're not available over here?

I think that's especially pertinent in terms of their out-of-print back catalogue. They're not going to profit from a second-hand sale so how does it effect them if I choose to download instead? I buy a lot of second-hand vinyl, but am I really supporting the artist when he's not seeing a penny of it?

I'm not asking you those questions specifically. I'm opening it up to the floor

briany

The thing about downloading is it's not really a morally justifiable practice but it has had certain positive outcomes. Netflix and Spotify would not exist without the entertainment industry having their hand forced by P2P, torrents, Usenet and even Youtube. Why would they have made them otherwise? They had a perfectly nice business model that was absolutely raking in money. Oh, I'm sure they would have eventually made some some sort of digital service, but it would have been some absolute DRM riddled, zero choice, token offering rather than a full-fledged attempt to compete with anything, because there would have been nothing to compete with.

The big entertainment companies are greedy, but so are the serial downloaders. However, these two forces of greed act as a balance. It's sad that it has to be this way, but I think the person willing to pay a fair price for a fair service is the winner here.

Bacchus

I stopped downloading music about 3 years ago when I started using Spotify and then moved to Google Music. I would have been about 20/80 in terms of music I bought vs music I downloaded before that. Anything I really liked, I'd buy the album, everything else was downloaded. I'm quite happy now paying for the Google Music service and I'm looking forward to the family plan (extra €5 for 6 people to share the account).

As for movies & TV, I would have been a heavy downloader up until about a year and half ago when I got Netflix. Again, it's a legal streaming service that I'm happy to pay for. Ok, the content isn't all there so I still download the odd movie and would still downloaded a few TV shows but nowhere near at the level that I used to.

IMO, Netflix, Spotify, Amazon Prime, Google Music, etc. are the way forward and as those services improve I imagine I'll be doing less downloading. The notion of buying media is dying IMO. Why would I want to spend €20+ on a Bluray of a movie I'll probably only watch once when I could pay for a service that lets me watch a whole catalog of movies for half the price of that one Bluray. Same goes for music, the cost of an album per month and I get all the music I can listen to in a lifetime. I do admit though, going digital has given me a itch to get into vinyl. There is something about have a physical copy of music that is nice.

Right Turn Clyde

Boards is throwing up a lot of double posts lately.



"I'm gonna go get the paper, get the papers."

Right Turn Clyde

Boards is throwing up a lot of double posts lately.



"I'm gonna go get the paper, get the papers."

eeguy

I used to be a prolific torrenter, but I hardly illegally download anything anymore.

I have an unlimited Cineworld card, a Netflix and Amazon Prime account and nearly every TV station has a catchup service. There's less and less reason to torrent in recent years as more content is legally online in streaming services.

Atlantic Dawn

With the death of Xtra Vision in this country the movie studios badly need to embrace online technology and either embrace what is there or setup their own systems, without either they will just encourage illegal downloading.

Right Turn Clyde

Bacchus wrote: »

Anything I really liked, I'd buy the album, everything else was downloaded.

So you downloaded music you didn't like?

jimmycrackcorm

VUE have renovated and expanded their cinema in liffey valley, hardly a sign of a market affected by illegal downloads.

Xtravision has been today affected by it but probably more by Netflix and sky movies on demand given that the vast majority of internet users wouldn't delve that much into torrenting

Bacchus

Right Turn Clyde wrote: »

So you downloaded music you didn't like?

No. I bought music I 'really' liked... as I said. The music I downloaded would typically be bands I wasn't too familiar with and was giving a listen to or else bands that I kinda liked, had a few good songs but I wasn't going spending money on.

SimonTemplar

eeguy wrote: »

I used to be a prolific torrenter, but I hardly illegally download anything anymore.

I have an unlimited Cineworld card, a Netflix and Amazon Prime account and nearly every TV station has a catchup service. There's less and less reason to torrent in recent years as more content is legally online in streaming services.

I thought Amazon Prime wasn't available in Ireland. You needed a UK originating credit card. Has it changed?

ancapailldorcha

eeguy wrote: »

I used to be a prolific torrenter, but I hardly illegally download anything anymore.

I have an unlimited Cineworld card, a Netflix and Amazon Prime account and nearly every TV station has a catchup service. There's less and less reason to torrent in recent years as more content is legally online in streaming services.

Same as myself. Valve founder Gabe Newell once said that piracy is the result of poor service and I agree. Make the content easily available through good service and people will pay for it.

briany

Going by technology news, the interest in piracy seems to be slowly but surely dying in western markets as people opt for legal services through devices designed for content consumption like iPad, Android devices, Smart TVs and Chromecast. Most people prefer easier and cheap over harder and free. They don't want the hassle. But I think a hardcore of downloaders will always remain, and they will be a base that expands if ever the legal options become once more overly expensive or draconian.

GalwayMagpie

Until I upgraded to Spotify Premium I was a big music downloader, but I find the small spotify fee I pay on top of my phone bundle to be worth it. The public playlists are fantastic.

I stream TV content from various sites/programs, as it is better that the paid service Netflix. Geo-blocking has made me reluctant to pay for Netflix, so until the paid service becomes as good as the free service they why pay for it? There are alternatives, until the corporations cop onto this, they will continue to lose out to the free apps.

Tar.Aldarion

The reason i don't pirate games is steam, the reason I don't pirate music is spotify. Netflix isn't all there for watching things. Some industries haven't moved with the ages, let that be on them. I won't pay for services if free alternatives are better. I will happily pay if otherwise.

ScumLord

I have a Netflix account but Netflix is fairly basic. I wouldn't mind paying more for a more complete service (except if it has ads. I'm not paying to watch ads). I don't have a TV and never will again, I don't think Sky is worth the money.

But outside of Netflix my options are limited. I'm thinking of switching to Amazon once they get Clarkson's show up, I doubt there would be any reason to keep both.

The problem I see arising is that you'll have each content maker charging their own flat fee and it will be just to expensive to have more than one or two of them on the go at any one time.

Sports is the only issue for me. All I watch is UFC and motorsports. UFC has an excellent service that I'm happy to pay for as and when I need it. A lot of motorsport is available on youtube, but F1 has hidden itself away behind a couch on sky so again, options are limited.

Zillah

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

The reason i don't pirate games is steam, the reason I don't pirate music is spotify. Netflix isn't all there for watching things. Some industries haven't moved with the ages, let that be on them. I won't pay for services if free alternatives are better. I will happily pay if otherwise.

Hell yes, this. I torrent all the time and it has very little to do with the money. I hate physical media. I hate having piles of old DVDs or CDs or whatever the hell stacked on shelves. I read on a Kindle. I want stuff quickly and easily and without any horrible hoops to jump through. Buying a disc is a hoop. Dealing with shipping is a hoop. Dealing with DRM is a hoop. Not only are the pirates offering a product for free, they're offering a far superior product.

I used to torrent games all the time, but it only occurred to me recently that it's been years since I bothered. I use Steam now. If a game is worth my time it's usually worth my money, and the sheer convenience of online purchasing and direct download is wonderful.

I literally can't remember the last time I pirated a music album. There's Youtube and Spotify. They're convenient. They give me access to what I want at the drop of a hat.

I don't torrent TV or movies as much as I used to - Netflix gives convenient access. But I still do it a lot. I torrent a lot of stuff that I would just say "no deal" if I had to pay for it. Wanna try a new TV show you heard about? Wanna buy a boxset for some stupid amount of money? Nope, no deal. If I bothered to sit in my sitting room at the right time, or set the box to record, I could have watched it for free anyway - me jumping through those hoops doesn't help the producers in any way. Get it onto a service like Netflix and get it into the 21st century and we can play ball.

I love the cinema, it is an experience I can't have at home, so when there is a movie that seems cinema-worthy I'll go and pay. Damned if I pay for the rewatch a year or two down the line though.

I really find people moralising and hand-wringing over copyright violation like this to be quite strange.

Mikey23

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Same as myself. Valve founder Gabe Newell once said that piracy is the result of poor service and I agree. Make the content easily available through good service and people will pay for it.

Good quote that. As our expectations change - 'Whaddya mean that show/movie isn't on Netflix/iPlayer/whatever' the day after - it just seems like the norm to hit our download sources of choice and get it. Waiting for media to be released in our territory just strikes us as patently unfair.

...look at me with the our/us to dodge personal responsibility

More seriously, I pay for Netflix, a good broadband connection, Apple Music and various gaming services (Xbox Live, PSN etc). I would dearly love to be able to have a 'movie night' with the missus where we can rent the latest cinema release in HD as it's a struggle to get sitters etc when we've two young kids. In my 20s, we'd go to the cinema every other week at least but it's just impossible. The cinema experience is great and all but for the next few years at least, it's not for us, and a potential customer is lost.

Xenji

"It is victimless crime. Like punching someone in the dark."

afatbollix

I used to download everything, But these days I have a good TV and a great sound system, Bad quality pisses me off. I got a great deal with Sky last year so have all the channels and a netflix acc.

I can usually download it off the sky box via the various iplayers or record it.

Most of Netflix stuff is now 5.1 so its just as good as a blue ray.

I own about 3 blue rays before I turned to streaming. I sold most of my DVDs a few years ago they were just clutter.

Make it easy for consumers and they will take the easy route instead of downloading.

Elemonator

eeguy wrote: »

I used to be a prolific torrenter, but I hardly illegally download anything anymore.

I have an unlimited Cineworld card, a Netflix and Amazon Prime account and nearly every TV station has a catchup service. There's less and less reason to torrent in recent years as more content is legally online in streaming services.

Do you mind me asking where you got an unlimited cinema card?

jester77

I still download a good bit of TV. I've Netflix, Amazon Prime and Sky, but it only covers a fraction of what I watch unless I want to watch it a few months later, by which time I'll know what happened. It's impossible to avoid spoilers these days.

Movies I see at the cinema or festivals, so that is fine for me.

Music got it right, I had Spotify for a while before moving to Google Music. Great service done right. If only the TV and movie business would do likewise.

Carlos Orange

Elemonator wrote: »

Do you mind me asking where you got an unlimited cinema card?

http://www.cineworld.ie/unlimited/intro

wobbles

Living in the country with internet thats as slow as a dial up, streaming is not an option for me. Netflix or spotify, nothing works as the connection is so slow. That leaves me with the only option to torrent, which itself can take days so you have to be sure its good quality.

Even if i wanted to buy or rent, Tesco would be the closest place to buy. With Xtravision gone, I dont even know where to rent a dvd from now.

Id gladly pay for a service if it was possible to actually use it but I just cant use them

Varik

Geo-blocking and regional restriction within the so call single market in the EU is the main thing that annoys me, the EU is actually looking at it now with the push for the digital single market.

EU brought stated an antitrust against some studios last year, over geo-blocking.

Notavirus.exe

I think the person uploading the copyrighted material should be the one to blame, not the person downloading it.

People say piracy hurts the industry. No it doesn't. Let's say I don't want to buy a film, the makers won't be getting any of my money. Whether I decide to download it or not doesn't affect the copyright holders.

Piracy isn't stealing. Piracy is downloading a copy of a digital item.

For legal reasons, I am not recommending that you pirate anything.

johnny_ultimate

The idea of a 'Spotify for Film' is a nice one, although pretty much impossible to implement. Spotify is already an ethical disaster in terms of supporting artists - and that's despite the fact music rights are generally simpler, the raw data significantly smaller and the overall costs generally far less than film. For consumers, it's a no-brainer, obviously, but it sadly comes at a cost to the people who deserve more (even Spotify themselves are hemorrhaging money). At least live music allows musicians to make a living in a 'free music' world, even if it puts significant pressure on independent to mid-tier artists to keep themselves active and visible.

Trying to match Spotify's almost all-encompassing scope in film would be a logistical nightmare in the first place. And for a consumer-friendly subscription service it would then be restrictively over-expensive to actively maintain. That's not just rights issues either - I believe it would almost inevitably lead to a substantial decrease in the variety of films being released in the first place, since there'd be a far less sustainable market overall. Even a service as large as Netflix can't manage anything more than a tiny fraction of the catalogue of cinema. Subscription based film streaming services are going to stay limited in scope, barring dramatically increasing their subscription fee or radical - and I mean radical - alterations in the way films are made, funded and distributed. It's a nice idea, but IMO nearly totally unfeasible.

It's always the independent artists I think it's important to consider, because the huge studios will continue to adapt and prosper. In film, the digital marketplace has not evolved sufficiently to support world, classic & independent cinema. One of the reasons I continue to spend so much money on Blu-Ray and cinema trips is to support the companies ensuring great films are translated, restored and released in the first place. It's already a struggle for these distributors and filmmakers to keep doing what they're doing, and illegally downloading won't help. Really the only time I'd be inclined to download anything is if it genuinely simply is not available legally in any way, shape or form.

It would be amazing to see a more robust digital space for films outside the mainstream, and I'd be first on board if there was. A 'Steam for films' is an intriguing prospect for sure (although Steam do already have a tiny film section!) - difficult to implement, but would be a great way to perhaps start a 'premium' location to distribute niche and leftfield films outside the theatrical and physical media space. Something with a 'library' and more sensible ownership options. Ultimately, I think the problem facing that sort of prospect is as much a consumer one as it is the backwards studios - paying for digital film is simply not something a very large proportion of the audience is used to, perhaps even prepared to, [ay for especially when you can pay 8.99 a month or nothing. You can't blame them in that regard, but beyond a major shift in attitudes, I think it might be up to smaller companies to try and win over the enthusiast audience that continues to prop up the Blu-Ray market with a more attractive offering.

On a tangential aside, happy to hear Arrow Films are going to be supporting Second Run films from here on out. Think it's beyond fantastic these smaller companies are working together to make sure there's still a significant choice of film out there

Zillah

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

The idea of a 'Spotify for Film' is a nice one, although pretty much impossible to implement.

How is that not just Netflix?

SimonTemplar

Zillah wrote: »

How is that not just Netflix?

It can take a long time for new Blu-Ray releases to appear there.

Zillah

Does new music instantly appear on Spotify?
(I genuinely don't know, I don't use it all that much)

There's no reason Netflix and similar couldn't take over the TV/DVD section of the market eventually. It goes Cinema -> Streaming, rather than Cinema-> DVD -> TV -> Streaming.

Right Turn Clyde

Zillah wrote: »

Does new music instantly appear on Spotify?
(I genuinely don't know, I don't use it all that much)

There's no reason Netflix and similar couldn't take over the TV/DVD section of the market eventually. It goes Cinema -> Streaming, rather than Cinema-> DVD -> TV -> Streaming.

Yes new music appears on Spotify instantly.

Classic Rock Man

Someone who isnt me hasnt payed for movies since 2008.

Someone who isnt me would pay for a good movie in the theatres every now and then though.

Chain Smoker

I download absolutely loads. Spend an absolute ton on films too, to the point that I doubt I'd be spending much more if I wasn't downloading to be honest.


It's the music industry that I screw out of it, don't even go to gigs, have absolutely no excuse for it.

SimonTemplar

I'll happily rent a movie on iTunes (and would do so with Amazon if it were available in Ireland).

However, if Apple/Distributors are greedy enough to only provide a purchase option for three times the cost of a rental, I will get the movie elsewhere.

errlloyd

I spend an ass tonne of money each year on the cinema. I don't have an unlimited card becuase I like going to lots of cinemas (and also grew sick of parnell Street after years of unlimited card), I have a Netflix and Spotify subscription too. So I spend well in excess of 500 quid a year on media, more if we include buying games.

I do pirate movies, and it's 90 percent for ease of use. I buy all my games on steam, all my books on Kindle etc, if there was a nice easy service for buying movies that didn't the lock me in I'd use it. If a movie is good I'll see it in the cinema. Revenant and Spotlight are two recent examples of movies I torrented, then went to see.

Im also kind of ambivalent to the arguments made by superstar artists (particularly Taylor Swift) about how they deserve X amount of money.

Poets, photographers, and the vast majority of musicians (think Orchestra here) get paid crap for what they do, and people sometimes buy their stuff, but wouldn't think twice about looking at a photo on imgur or reading a poem off a website. Architects and sculptors make cities beautiful in a tangible way, their art is usually enjoyed mostly by people who didn't pay for it, and sponsored by wealthy patrons. Why are there all these differing philosophies on what art we should pay for and what art we should expect for free.

ScrubsfanChris

afatbollix wrote: »

Most of Netflix stuff is now 5.1 so its just as good as a blue ray.

Ahem.....
I'm sorry, but no steaming service comes even close to the picture and audio quality of blu-ray. If you think otherwise then there is something wrong with your setup.

As regards the main point. Very rarely download films myself, am an avid cinema going and blu-ray collector. It's tv shows mostly for me, and just a few a week at that.

endacl

I'd be willing to give it a try, if I could get more than dialup speeds from UPC/Virgin, or whatever they're calling themselves these days...

:mad:

SimonTemplar

ScrubsfanChris wrote: »

Ahem.....
I'm sorry, but no steaming service comes even close to the picture and audio quality of blu-ray. If you think otherwise then there is something wrong with your setup.

As regards the main point. Very rarely download films myself, am an avid cinema going and blu-ray collector. It's tv shows mostly for me, and just a few a week at that.

Well that's another argument for illegal downloading. I've seen full blu-ray rips of movies on torrent sits at about 20 Gigs versus the 5-6 Gigs you'll get on iTunes HD. I understand that some users will have broadband issues, but at least give the users the choice so they can stream at blu-ray quality if they are able to. Maybe even a full pre-buffer or time-dependent download (like BBC iPlayer) could mitigate that.

My point is: give us the choice and we'll decide what quality / file size is best for us.

gar32

I live in Germany and got a bill for €800 for using torrent for 10 mins. I did not pay it but got a court order 2 years later and had to pay a solicitor to sort it out for me. I still may be given a court date and be fined up too 5k. My VPN when down for those 10 mins.

I don't down load any more. Netflix and streaming some movies.

Enjoy the fact you can download if you want.

Boskowski

I'm a convenience downloader these days. As in too much hard work to record that tv series over several weeks on that box with limited space. Or that tv series that I missed and where the first 3 series are already gone off catch-up tv. Just grab the whole thing of torrents in the space of a couple of hours, sorted. The lawyers would probably argue otherwise but I think I'm not doing anything wrong. It's been released already for home consumption, I've already paid for it, contributed to the value chain. It's just a logistical thing now.
I've got Sky with most trimmings, I dabble in and out of Netflix, I go the cinema a lot and pay for most of my music unless for old, exotic stuff I'd have trouble sourcing in the first place. I buy actual books a lot and I buy from amazon, too. Now that I see it front of me, I probably spend a fair bit of money every year on media.
Never been a horder anyway and I wouldn't download any crap and would never download that cam movie, web release, whatever, it isn't worth it. It would only ruin that movie for me. If If I'm that keen to see it I go to the cinema, if not I can wait 'til its on top quality on sky movies or netflix or something.
I do streamsports occasionally. Tonight for example. I pay a ton for sport subscriptions. And the only match on the box is friggin Westham v Villa, wtf?

Right Turn Clyde

Boskowski wrote: »

I do streamsports occasionally. Tonight for example. I pay a ton for sport subscriptions. And the only match on the box is friggin Westham v Villa, wtf?

Do you support one of the 'big teams'? If you do then your team is on TV at least every ten days, if not every week.

When it comes to mid-week Premier League fixtures the broadcaster's policy (possibly as part of their contract) has been to showcase the so called 'smaller teams'.

So imagine being a Villa or West Ham fan. You're only on TV live maybe half a dozen times each year and when you are it's probably against one of the top 6 teams in the table.

Rubber_Soul

Notavirus.exe wrote: »

People say piracy hurts the industry. No it doesn't. Let's say I don't want to buy a film, the makers won't be getting any of my money. Whether I decide to download it or not doesn't affect the copyright holders.

That may be true of you but your anecdotal evidence doesn't mean anything. There's plenty out there who will download a film or tv show they would have bought or paid to see in the cinema/cable sub.

Piracy isn't stealing. Piracy is downloading a copy of a digital item.

This is nonsense. Products can be both tangible and intangible. That no tangible, physical media has been stolen is irrelevant. The fact you're depriving the content creator of money for use of their product makes it theft.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

SpaceCowb0y

Thank God for torrents! Sure wasn't it himself who gave mankind the intelligence to create such a thing to save us from wasting our hard earned cash on movies that might end up only being a 2 and a half out of 5!

I watch hundreds of movies every year, literally. I'd be a poor man if i went to see each one in the cinema! If there's something i really want to see that i feel needs to be seen on a big screen i will of course pay my way, for example Star Wars, Interstellar or the latest James Bond movie etc but there's so many movies I end up watching that i'm so glad i didn't end up paying to watch.

I don't really download torrents anymore anyway, Android boxes that let you stream straight from the web are the way to go these days! Kodi provides all my entertainment these days.

Boskowski

Right Turn Clyde wrote: »

Do you support one of the 'big teams'? If you do then your team is on TV at least every ten days, if not every week.

When it comes to mid-week Premier League fixtures the broadcaster's policy (possibly as part of their contract) has been to showcase the so called 'smaller teams'.

So imagine being a Villa or West Ham fan. You're only on TV live maybe half a dozen times each year and when you are it's probably against one of the top 6 teams in the table.

I understand your point about being a Villa supporter. But I'm probably not typical, I don't really support a team. I like teams who are playing good football. I like Arsenal - I guess you could say I support them- but would have liked to watch Leicester last night. There were a couple of interesting matches in the title race that day. Well, I suppose there often are. But anyway thats not the point. The point is they (the EPL) make so much money from these sports subscriptions. I have Sky Sports and in and out of BT, too. I should have every single match available to me or at least a selection of a handful. Not one single match.