1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

TV Shows & Piracy

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Tommy B, 3 Jun 2006.

  1. Tommy B

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 23 Nov 2004

    Posts: 8,027

    Location: The Place To Be

    Mods - A healthy debate on the subject is surely not against the rules? If this thread must be deleted, please lock it and leave a reason!

    I can understand the fuss about downloading movies, games, music and software, but I must admit I'm not sure why downloading TV shows is frowned upon to the same extent?

    Many of the people downloading TV shows probably have Sky, and thus the ability to watch it at no extra cost. In effect, all they are doing is moving the programme for viewing at their own convenience. To be honest, why should we have to wait several months after the American screenings?

    Everyone has been shocked at the success of iTunes, but think about it. There was a gigantic demand for downloading music. Why should people have to buy an entire album if they want one song? iTunes came along, and suddenly most people have no problem with paying for their music. Granted there are always the fussy muppets complaining about DRM, but at the end of the day, for those with iPods it's an ideal solution.

    The iTunes American store offers Lost episodes. If those episodes were available for downloading here, I would happily pay for each and every one of them. As it is, I've had to wait for the utterly useless C4 to catch up with America.

    To conclude, my point is that I don't think the "industry" have any right co complain about TV show piracy. If they don't make an effort to either meet our demands, or "sync" British & American TV more convincingly, why should they make such a fuss?
     
  2. |Ric|

    Hitman

    Joined: 28 Jun 2005

    Posts: 895

    TV piracy has clearly made them think a bit harder about synching shows over here. Some shows (like SG1) caught back up due to the long breaks they put in american tv. Also 24 isn't that far behind the american showing.

    I have always considered it to be a grey area about downloading TV. For example if come Monday morning I download Top Gear (that screended the previous Sunday) because I am busy revising for an exam I have on Monday and didnt go to the college bar or tv room to watch it, how is that illegal? Considering the BBC now stream the episodes of top gear of their website but at far worse quality than you could go onto bit torrent or the like.
    I don't know if that technically is illegal, I assume it is, or at least The Man would tell me it is because it uses p2p.

    That is slightly off topic from what you said as you are talking about american shows.
    Again I don't see how copyright and the like extend to me being told when I can see something. Either I can or I can't right?
     
  3. Weebull

    Capodecina

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 13,308

    Location: Belfast

    I think the odd thing about TV, as opposed to films or music is that the user doesn't really have to pay any extra to use the legal equivalent. So whereas it's mainly selfish greed that motivates people to download the latest album or film ("I can have it free instead of having to pay for it? Bargain!"), that's not really the case with TV shows, as advertising covers the cost that the user would otherwise spend. With these, the main benefit to downloading is simply that you get to see the episode far sooner than it takes to be aired over here (since most downloaded series are American), rather than wait 6 months+ like shows often are. This point is pretty easy for the telly companies to remedy, since all they need to do is not mess around making us wait ages for new series, and they'll have a lot less downloaders.

    The other major reason for downloading though, is that of plain ease-of-use. With shows on TV, the only time you get to watch them are when they're scheduled to be shown. As the example above says, say I wanted to watch a certain episode of something but was otherwise engaged that night and had no way of recording it. Why should I be forced to miss a programme I really wanted to watch just because the schedules say so, when I could just as easily download it the next day and watch whenever I like? The annoying thing is, that in this age of digital satelite and high-bandwith whatnot, we're still forced to watch programmes when the schedules tell us to. Why can't we pick and choose what we want to watch, and when? Until that's made possible, it's going to remain a massive plus point for downloading imo.
     
  4. Tommy B

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 23 Nov 2004

    Posts: 8,027

    Location: The Place To Be

    Your point on advertising is quite relevant. Another incentive to watch pirated TV shows is the fact they are free of adverts. Most channels have 4 sets of adverts per hour, whilst this is annoying, it bugs me even more that they have the first set literally about 2 minutes into a programme. I actually think that goes against the adverts completely. Adverts shouldn't annoy people, after all, they are trying to sell you a product.

    Sky have addressed the issue of convenience with their Sky+ service, but it's not exactly the most reliable gadget in the world. I can't help but think the future of TV lies in the internet. Broadband is getting so fast you can practically stream HD via the net. Suddenly, an iTunes-esque platform becomes a more realistic option.

    I still think the highest priority should be getting TV shows broadcast QUICKER in the UK though.
     
    Last edited: 3 Jun 2006
  5. Loki

    Asus Rep

    Joined: 17 Nov 2004

    Posts: 9,827

    Location: The Republic

    Thats the salient point though.

    The reason why its illegal to do so is because it enables the TV Companies to maximise revenues and profits. I would assume that CH4 bought Lost season 2 for £X Million pounds. They then have to recoup that money via advertising and sponsorship. Hence the particular show having advertising by 118 118. They predict viewing trends etc. Given that say the last episode may attract a large audience then the UK broadcaster would want to hold out for the maxiumu ammount of money available from potential advertisers. They would not cough up the money if it were downloadable from iTunes and the potentail number of people viewing their advert was cut in half. This then feeds up the food chain so when Channel 4 buy say lost Season 3 they will offer less because viewing figures are down and less attractive to potential advertisers.

    So the owning company (FOX, HBO etc)is cutting of biting the hand that feeds if it allows the digital rights to be redistributed before some of their paying partners. Bearing in mind a lot of licesinsg agreements are about you as an indivdual being allowed to watch said TV Prog/Film this does not mean you are the owner of that film
     
  6. BubbySoup

    Mobster

    Joined: 22 Nov 2003

    Posts: 2,846

    Location: Cardiff

    I think this is the crux of the issue. Having the right to view a programme does not mean you have the right to store it in a distributable format. I'm pretty sure it is still technically illegal to tape an episode of Eastenders and give it to your mum, but don't quote me on that.

    Obviously another matter to consider is that once you have said episode in digital form, you can store and replicate it as many times as you like without loss of quality.

    You are also able to download TV series in entire seasons, which would impact on later DVD sales. Ironically, if you download the hi-def versions (assuming US shows) you end up with a superior image quality than you can currently purchase here in the UK.
     
  7. axe

    Banned

    Joined: 1 May 2006

    Posts: 600

    I think Streaming over the Internet is the future with a Itunes Method.

    All you have to do is put a Advert at the begining and the End or Even 1 in the Middle so people still see adverts , but also get the ability to watch the program whenit suites them .

    I dont really think we are ready tho i think speeds need to be bumped up on broadband and reliabilty improved as its all good NTL offering 10mb but ever since then ive had trouble
     
  8. crashuk

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 7 Dec 2005

    Posts: 2,691

    Bittorrent sites are they actually breaking the copy right law? i dont think so they dont host the files,

    The other day swedish police raided servers belonging to a big torrent site, on top of that i heard they broke some rights at the same time. Just wondering what happens to servers hosted in international waters like oil rigs etc.. theres no law on copyrights but then again there no protection.

    My personal opinion on torrents i am all for them large companies break or bend copy rights to suit their needs, they charge an arm and a leg for the content, and put crap, torrent sites are valuable tools for self learning, i have donated in the passed year £30 to torrent sites, in order so they keep up the good work.
     
    Last edited: 4 Jun 2006
  9. Vanilla

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 9,360

    Yup, and they're already back up. They were only down for around two or three days. As far as i'm aware the police couldn't press charges because no copyright files were held on their site. So they let them go.
     
  10. Phil99

    Capodecina

    Joined: 29 Oct 2004

    Posts: 10,900

    It was relocated to another country shortly after it was taken down, not sure of the current status of the Swedish investigations.
     
  11. Tommy B

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 23 Nov 2004

    Posts: 8,027

    Location: The Place To Be

    Of course the obvious reason for piracy is outrageous prices. Imagine a world where all new albums are £5 and DVDs £10. Who on earth pays £21 for a DVD, with no booklet, no special features, and crammed full of adverts. As a matter of fact, when they put adverts on DVDs it boils my blood. I really do get angry, because it's theft. How dare they charge me so much for a DVD and then have the cheek to put adverts on it.

    The EU seriously need to do something about this. They should protect consumers by placing a MAXIMUM price on things like DVDs and CDs. It's the same with iTunes tbh. We have to pay £1/song here, where as it's more like 50p /song in the US, and 70p/song in France. It's only a matter of time before we see an 'iTunes Europe' service where the price is in Euros.
     
  12. Phil99

    Capodecina

    Joined: 29 Oct 2004

    Posts: 10,900

    If you shop around you can get most albums for £8.99 online and DVDs around £14.99...seems like fair prices to me. That's what, 3 tickets to the cinema and you get to watch the DVD as many times as you want.

    Adverts on DVDs do really annoy me though, the movie studios can claim that it's to subsidise the cost of the DVD, but it's not as if they don't make enough money as it is. Putting adverts on a DVD is certainly not theft though, what makes you think it is? Is Sky TV theft because they put adverts on their channels?
     
  13. crashuk

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 7 Dec 2005

    Posts: 2,691

    you buy a dvd because you only want to see the film, lets put it this way you buy a cd and between tracks theres adverts would you be happy?
     
  14. Phil99

    Capodecina

    Joined: 29 Oct 2004

    Posts: 10,900

    I know, and no I wouldn't.

    I'm not backing up the adverts at all, I'd be alot happier if there were no adverts at all on DVDs. Calling adverts on DVDs "theft" is utter madness though.
     
  15. Tommy B

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 23 Nov 2004

    Posts: 8,027

    Location: The Place To Be

    I don't buy DVDs for the sake of it. I buy DVDs of films I love (of which there are not many thanks to the fiscal, passion-less nature of Hollywood) and thus they are items of value to me. Having paid £15 for the DVD, I do not expect to find adverts on it. Not only are they degrading to the film, but also to the consumer.

    If every film that came out of Hollywood was worthy of the high price tag, I wouldn't have a problem, but that isn't the case. We are in an era of generational film-makers. People who somehow get into the indusry by default, probably because of their relatives. Film-making should be the height of creativity and passion, not "just another job" which is the view of many figures in Hollywood. Despite the fact I personally don't rate it, Lord Of The Rings is an "incredible" film because of Peter Jackson's passion and dedication.
    When will they realise that people (or perhaps I'm wrong!?) are sick of this 'oh lets go and see another crap watch-it-once movie at the cinema" crap.

    To put this all in perspective, I am yet to buy a "modern" film this year. I've bought Withnail & I, Shawshank Redemption and Leon so far. Sin City was taken back because I was disgusted that £20 got me a DVD full of adverts and no fancy booklet. I block-bustered Transporter 2, which was good until the director raised the white flag and used CGI. Hell, I could have sworn I was watching a PS2 game. It was that bad!


    To answer your question though, I pay Sky a small sum each month and the service they provide is excellent. I get to watch football matches, rugby matches, a selection of films, all my favourite programmes etc. I'm quite happy for there to be adverts because it isn't a material good. DVDs, on the other hand, are a different story.
     
    Last edited: 4 Jun 2006
  16. Psyk

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 8,444

    Location: Leamington Spa

    It's an interesting point about shows from the BBC. In theory you should be allowed to freely download and watch them if you have a TV license. But of course that is not the case.
     
  17. MR_Punk

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 23 Mar 2004

    Posts: 7,940

    Location: Up t'north

    The bbc are however putting programs on the internet to stream and watch whenever you want. Which is alot more than other channels do. Fair enough there isnt much of a selection but at least its a start.

    One of the main problems with downloading programs and films is piracy the minority spoiling it for us.

    +44
     
  18. Weebull

    Capodecina

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 13,308

    Location: Belfast

    The point about advertising is why I think that we could well see the point soon (if illegal downloading actually gets to the stage of really affecting viewing figures) where programme makers think "sod it" and start putting product placement within their shows. That way, it completely nullifies downloading being illegal, as all the advertising would be within the episode, and thus unremovable by people online. Of course, I doubt you'd get that good a programme if it's tied to advertising commitments every episode, but I think someone may well try soon.
     
  19. wnb

    Mobster

    Joined: 27 Feb 2004

    Posts: 3,951

    Tv producers will have to move with the times or they will see a drop in viewing figures, this will directly effect the revenue they receive from advertisers. The like of stargate, BG amd Invasion have been shown near enough the same time as the states. This is what we want, what we don't want is having to wait months for your favorite show to be shown, its not uncommon for the states to have shown the first 12 episodes before it appears over here.