THE PAVILION ANNEX

General discussions of interest to readers and fans of Harlan Ellison.

Moderator: Moderator

cynic
Posts: 2684
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 3:55 am
Location: chicago

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby cynic » Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:17 pm

"how do you know who your daddy is? because your mama told you so!"

close to a movie line, don't remember which one; it'll come to me.

so the virgin mary had that goin' for her.
follow your bliss,mike

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Moderator » Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:19 pm

markabaddon wrote:OK, so a guy in a clothing store said I needed a "denim intervention", but still.......



'Tis truth. In Laguna Beach, no less.

Too bad the ladies encountered a jewelry intervention before the denim could be dealt with.
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

cynic
Posts: 2684
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 3:55 am
Location: chicago

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby cynic » Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:28 pm

FrankChurch wrote:I take it back Mike. You own me.
uhh, i hadn't seen this before my last post.
how odd :|

be your own frank; not zmags puppet.

but that doesn't explain the comment;
"The jews have stayed culturally tight, that's the secret. Blacks, on the other hand are broken."

i don't really expect an explaination; just a suggestion, question your own motives as well as those around you.

i'm quite sure i don't do it enough myself.
follow your bliss,mike

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby FrankChurch » Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:35 pm

Mike's a hoot.

cynic
Posts: 2684
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 3:55 am
Location: chicago

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby cynic » Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:44 pm

FrankChurch wrote:Mike's a hoot.
do i make you laugh? :|
like a clown? :|



just kidding :wink:
follow your bliss,mike

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby FrankChurch » Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:25 pm

Earl Wells needs a puppy or thicker skin.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby FrankChurch » Wed Mar 23, 2011 1:32 pm

A fucking felony for streaming copywritten material? You know that shit would be thrown out of court or I hope.

Barber, you can't possibly support that? Selling material is one thing, streaming it?

Pure evil.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Moderator » Wed Mar 23, 2011 3:18 pm

FrankChurch wrote:A fucking felony for streaming copywritten material? You know that shit would be thrown out of court or I hope.

Barber, you can't possibly support that? Selling material is one thing, streaming it?

Pure evil.


If you don't own it, don't pass it along.

But I'd say it should be evaluated appropriately rather than being an automatic felony. Someone posting a tv commercial, for instance, doesn't really damage the product since it's fulfilling its own purpose. On the other hand, streaming a copyrighted tv show wihtout permission -- or ripping copies of Avatar -- are theft of property. If someone stands outside your house and hands your keys to people for them to take a joyride -- then takes offense when you find out what's going on and take steps to stop them -- they're idiots of the greatest magnitude. So why is it okay for those same people to take the keys to your tv show and let other people watch it for free?

Property is property is property.

If it ain't yours, don't take it upon yourself to give it away. Simple.
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby FrankChurch » Wed Mar 23, 2011 3:28 pm

You forgot something pretty obvious: how does somebody know you are streaming something? Right, there would have to be cyber-snoops, people looking at what you are looking at. This is like Bush's wiretaps, but we are all criminals.

The internet should be free of snooping. If that means some rich folk--and don't say that this is just about small actors, since I'm sure huge corporations support this--lose some money, big whoop.

The idea that some dumb teenager, who doesn't know the law can go to jail--that is one slippery slope I do not want to hump over.

The best thing is what the Blue Monkey Squad does--find a Harlan story on some sight and contact Harlan. Harlan's lawyers do the rest.

I also think free streaming helps the art in the end, because someone gets a preview and may buy it later. I have done just that many times.

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Moderator » Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:24 pm

Frank, some dumb teenagers can go to jail for a lot of reasons, not just streaming video on their website. And, let's be honest, the vast majority of people know precisely what they're doing and are happy to screww the system. Doesn't matter whether it's a large corporation or an individual artist they're ripping off. (Is shoplifting from Target less significant than shoplifting from the local antiques dealer?) (Is stealing a Kia not the crime stealing a Lexus is?)

It's astoundingly greedy to assert that it's okay to steal peoples' work is okay as long as it's the big corporation who gets hurt. If a new band has a deal with a label, that deal vanishes if the label can't make a profit. Period. So by ripping the music and passing it along, you're ruining the band's chances of a renewal. It isn't just the company who gets hurt. Same with a tv show. If someone streams a show they're doing exactly the same thing. If their streaming reduces the audience for the actual show, how do the producers make money? Once you remove the financial incentive for an entity, why would you possibly expect them to continue dumping money into a product with no revenue stream.

You either own it, or you don't.

If you don't own it, you're doing a temendous disservice to the very people you feel are good enough to be passed along. You're killing your own favorite, and you're essentially telling them their art is worthless to you.

So I've got very little tolerance for idiot teenagers -- or anyone else -- who don't spend money to support their favorites -- and worse, those feel entitled to copies even if it ruins someone else's chance to make some money from their work.
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

cynic
Posts: 2684
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 3:55 am
Location: chicago

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby cynic » Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:01 pm

Barber wrote: Property is property is property.

If it ain't yours, don't take it upon yourself to give it away. Simple.

especially if it's the feds with taxes.

but only if they take it from california, and give it to those useless, unworthy, mean (etc. etc. etc.) conservative states.

they can give it to anyone but them.

jerk teenagers.

it's mine.
follow your bliss,mike

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Moderator » Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:22 pm

cynic wrote:
Barber wrote: Property is property is property.

If it ain't yours, don't take it upon yourself to give it away. Simple.

especially if it's the feds with taxes.

but only if they take it from california, and give it to those useless, unworthy, mean (etc. etc. etc.) conservative states.

they can give it to anyone but them.

jerk teenagers.

it's mine.


Well, just the opposite from the line you're drawing. Pay for what you get. So, yeah, taxes. Though you're right that Californians pay too much and others don't pay enough. But we all pay for what we get. Try stiffing the government sometime and see how quickly they insist you "pay the writer".
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
Ezra Lb.
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:02 am
Location: Washington, DC

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Ezra Lb. » Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:23 am

The internet should be free of snooping.

The best thing is what the Blue Monkey Squad does...

So no govt snooping. Just let the citizens spy on each other? :wink:

I also think free streaming helps the art in the end, because someone gets a preview and may buy it later.

But that exchange is consensual. Nobody is arguing about that.
“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”
-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter

User avatar
Moderator
Site Admin
Posts: 10607
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 12:17 pm
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby Moderator » Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:11 am

Ezra Lb. wrote:The internet should be free of snooping.

The best thing is what the Blue Monkey Squad does...

So no govt snooping. Just let the citizens spy on each other? :wink:

I also think free streaming helps the art in the end, because someone gets a preview and may buy it later.

But that exchange is consensual. Nobody is arguing about that.


Two words for the self-policing argument: Westboro Baptist.

Do you really want them in charge of monitoring your site?

Secondly, on the argument of "get a preview and maybe buy it" is pure nonsense. Absolute and pure. This isn't a world of an artistic test-drive -- if you watch or listen to a stream chances are you'll either find a way to save the stream or you'll simply not want to do so. Either way it kills the sale. Put a thirty second clip up of a tv show? Yeah, maybe. But that's not -- in reality -- what people are doing. They're streaming everything, lock stock and barrel. That kills the sale. period. Arguing contrarily ignores the reality of the last decade.
- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
FinderDoug
Posts: 1530
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

Re: THE PAVILION ANNEX

Postby FinderDoug » Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:52 am

Selling material is one thing, streaming it?


So in this argument, Frank, it's acceptable to take On The Road With Ellison and slap up a stream, and nothing should be done to me, because I'm not actually making a copy available? And if a hundred people take advantage of that, how much has just been taken out of Harlan's pocket? Because there are easy, free tools to capture that as it comes over the computer, and your percentage of purchasers is going to be very, very low out of that hundred. It isn't just a matter of making a copy anymore - providing access actually has to count, or the fight is useless.

how does somebody know you are streaming something? Right, there would have to be cyber-snoops, people looking at what you are looking at.


That's the absolute worst-case frantic hysterical argument. ISPs can see volume without seeing what that volume constitutes, and media (with the exception of your MP3 files) is a bandwidth hog. I'd say if you're a Comcast home subscriber that's using 100GB of bandwidth A DAY, you've got the digital equivalent of probable cause for a search. It's no different than investigating why a guy in an apartment in Queens is suddenly buying acetone by the container truck load.

The idea that some dumb teenager, who doesn't know the law can go to jail


Maybe he should consider - and this is a normal part of learning right from wrong going back to not taking from a store without paying - the consequences of his actions before undertaking them. If his defense is "I didn't know I couldn't make it available for free to a global audience; I just thought I couldn't copy it," then the experience might be a very educational one for him.

I also think free streaming helps the art in the end, because someone gets a preview and may buy it later. I have done just that many times.


And there are many artists who also feel this way. A good number of musicians, for instance, allow taping or file-swapping of live gigs, and for me, it's broadened my horizons. But in the end, it's the artist's choice. And if a musician, or an author, or a photographer wants their work protected, there should be safeguards for them and recourse to protect their investment of energy and time and sweat.

And yeah - that includes companies that invest money in developing brands and product. The notion that one should steal from Disney because Disney won't miss it is untenable, not only because Disney employs 144k people worldwide, but because you can't pick and choose who gets protected by this law or that. You cannot say "We MUST MUST MUST preserve Harlan Ellison's work from piracy and theft!" and at the same time say "Go ahead and stream "Sleeping Beauty" because fuck it, it's Disney!" If Disney wants to give it away? Different story.

Is there a lot wrong with the system? Absolutely. The studios are hot to blame piracy for killing box office, but disingenuously ignore that they cut their own throats with the desire to get everything on video almost as soon as it leaves theaters (creating a whole generation that doesn't remember a time when you saw it in theaters or you waited four years for television - giving the audience the power to say "Pass" and hardly notice the wait on product that has become increasingly substandard for greater and greater cost end-to-end). This STILL doesn't mean they aren't entitled to protect their product.

Ditto the major labels. They have their issues. Does piracy contribute to their woes? Absolutely. But signing a band and paying to produce an album and mounting a tour and then doing nothing to promote the album doesn't do much to contribute to the bottom line either. The record industry needs to take responsibility for its own failings of process - but that STILL doesn't mean they aren't entitled to protect their product.

And in the end, I still haven't heard anyone who asserts their entitlement to post, share and distribute creative work illegally give a cogent answer as to why they don't think an artist should get paid.

***

And even as I wrote this, EMI apparently has come up with an interesting application of tech to the multimedia experience:

http://blogs.forrester.com/mark_mulliga ... s_from_emi


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests