Poor old mrgoat! Tries to explain what he sees as self evident, based on what seems like onlne research, then gets pilloried! People might know that mrgoat isn't my favourite person on this forum, but I cant help but feeling some sympathy for him here - don't shoot the messenger!
Don't know if this helps at all but...
a) in Russia over the new year, I met a magician who had no qualms about downloading from torrents, because, in Russia at least, it was not illegal.I know of a couple of people who are trying to convince him on an individual basis that, even if it isn't illegal, it harms magic.
b) Also in russia I heard that CDs were available, legally, in a very basic form, very cheaply, to help counter the illegal trade - but that there were also high quaity CD boxes with lyrics etc available at a higher price.
c) From personal experience, I'm annoyed when I buy a "mass market" DVD, which has no notes - the recent release of the compete Tony Hancock is a good example. I'd have been happy to pay for a deluxe version. And I note the recent DVD Magic Ranch DVD doesn't even have a track listing. I'd have paid extra for that.
Oh, yes - its true - pdfs are pretty cheap to produce, so this probably isnt the route forward - but - for once - I'm with mrgoat - we should at least be exploring what else we can do here. It's probably more productive than name calling.
One exposure site feels the pain...
-
El Mystico
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa
- Contact:
-
Brad Henderson
- Posts: 4550
- Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: austin, tx
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Goat,
This is an important discussion as it speaks to the nature of discourse. So much of what we do here, not only online, but in life, is a sharing of ideas. Some of these ideas come from replicable science - but most of them come from personal experiences and the experiences of others. If, for example, someone were to ask about the presentation of a trick and another were to report he had seen a magician present it that way at a county fair I think most would extend the courtesy of believing it true. You may not. But unless you had cause not to believe someone - who perhaps signs his name to his post - then I think that reflects on who you are. And this exchange has been revelatory in that manner.
Likewise, if someone were to report that his teacher had described a performance he once saw, I think most would extend the courtesy of belief unless they had cause to do otherwise.
As you have said, there have been many posts which have been based on your experience. It seems to me, that if you feel the right course of action is to dismiss anything by anyone not known to you, then we should do the same. You may accuse me of reading your words wrong, but I think that is a fair interpretation of them, even if it is one with which you disagree.
The troubling part is that you seem to support a position that if someone's experience runs counter to what you believe, then it is irrelevant, meaningless, like someone's report of a nonexistent supernatural experience. That is far too convenient of a dismissal. And one, that I think, is rude. Not name calling. I am talking about your behavior, not you...clearly I cannot evaluate you as I do not know who you are. By your standards - you should not be trusted, believed.
Now, as to this "liar" business. While those words may not have escaped your fingers, let's look at the content of the message. I related something shared with me by another. You have chosen not to believe it. Why?
There are only two reasons. Either you do not believe that what they told me is true - and as we are discussing their reports of their behaviors and feelings, interpretive fact is not at issue - or you do not believe that what I have told you is true. You rationalize this by saying you don't know me, or them, but this is the core of your message. I am not to be believed, or they are not to be believed.
Now, you may wish you skirt around the word liar - or maybe I am just a bear of very little brain - but if you claim their statement to me is not true (that it is not to be believed) then are you not calling them a liar? If you are saying my statement to you is not true (that it is not to be believed), are you not calling me one?
To bring this back to the point, you made posts which imply that lawsuits are having no effect. Even though there exists no causal evidence to this point, and even the MPAA couch their opinion as assumption, I think it is reasonable to consider the negative consequences of the lawsuits.
My experience with someone who has actually been sued - an experience I presume you have not had - indicates that their behaviors HAVE changed. Now, if you choose not to acknowledge that as true, then how am I to read that other than you accusing me of stating an untruth?
Is this small change going to outweigh the potential publicity the lawsuits have caused leading people to the piracy sites? I don't know.
But I know that to say they have NO effect is wrong. I know that these lawsuits have impacted people. I have seen how it has affected them and I have spoken with their peers and they have shared how it has impacted their beliefs as well.
Now, I realize this runs counter to your assertion, and I can understand how dismissing it makes life easier. But when you dismiss it - because you don't know who I am, though I sign my name, and you don't know who they are, though I have vouched for them - then it makes me wonder why.
Is it belligerence? Stubbornness? Arrogance?
Or is it simply that you don't believe me - which isn't that really the same as saying that either they must have lied to me, or that now I am lying to you?
Can you see how that attitude makes all discourse irrelevant - especially that posted by a Goat - and is not at the very least, simply rude?
Brad Henderson
This is an important discussion as it speaks to the nature of discourse. So much of what we do here, not only online, but in life, is a sharing of ideas. Some of these ideas come from replicable science - but most of them come from personal experiences and the experiences of others. If, for example, someone were to ask about the presentation of a trick and another were to report he had seen a magician present it that way at a county fair I think most would extend the courtesy of believing it true. You may not. But unless you had cause not to believe someone - who perhaps signs his name to his post - then I think that reflects on who you are. And this exchange has been revelatory in that manner.
Likewise, if someone were to report that his teacher had described a performance he once saw, I think most would extend the courtesy of belief unless they had cause to do otherwise.
As you have said, there have been many posts which have been based on your experience. It seems to me, that if you feel the right course of action is to dismiss anything by anyone not known to you, then we should do the same. You may accuse me of reading your words wrong, but I think that is a fair interpretation of them, even if it is one with which you disagree.
The troubling part is that you seem to support a position that if someone's experience runs counter to what you believe, then it is irrelevant, meaningless, like someone's report of a nonexistent supernatural experience. That is far too convenient of a dismissal. And one, that I think, is rude. Not name calling. I am talking about your behavior, not you...clearly I cannot evaluate you as I do not know who you are. By your standards - you should not be trusted, believed.
Now, as to this "liar" business. While those words may not have escaped your fingers, let's look at the content of the message. I related something shared with me by another. You have chosen not to believe it. Why?
There are only two reasons. Either you do not believe that what they told me is true - and as we are discussing their reports of their behaviors and feelings, interpretive fact is not at issue - or you do not believe that what I have told you is true. You rationalize this by saying you don't know me, or them, but this is the core of your message. I am not to be believed, or they are not to be believed.
Now, you may wish you skirt around the word liar - or maybe I am just a bear of very little brain - but if you claim their statement to me is not true (that it is not to be believed) then are you not calling them a liar? If you are saying my statement to you is not true (that it is not to be believed), are you not calling me one?
To bring this back to the point, you made posts which imply that lawsuits are having no effect. Even though there exists no causal evidence to this point, and even the MPAA couch their opinion as assumption, I think it is reasonable to consider the negative consequences of the lawsuits.
My experience with someone who has actually been sued - an experience I presume you have not had - indicates that their behaviors HAVE changed. Now, if you choose not to acknowledge that as true, then how am I to read that other than you accusing me of stating an untruth?
Is this small change going to outweigh the potential publicity the lawsuits have caused leading people to the piracy sites? I don't know.
But I know that to say they have NO effect is wrong. I know that these lawsuits have impacted people. I have seen how it has affected them and I have spoken with their peers and they have shared how it has impacted their beliefs as well.
Now, I realize this runs counter to your assertion, and I can understand how dismissing it makes life easier. But when you dismiss it - because you don't know who I am, though I sign my name, and you don't know who they are, though I have vouched for them - then it makes me wonder why.
Is it belligerence? Stubbornness? Arrogance?
Or is it simply that you don't believe me - which isn't that really the same as saying that either they must have lied to me, or that now I am lying to you?
Can you see how that attitude makes all discourse irrelevant - especially that posted by a Goat - and is not at the very least, simply rude?
Brad Henderson
Brad Henderson magician in Austin Texas
-
Nicholas Carifo
- Posts: 179
- Joined: March 13th, 2008, 11:40 am
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Contact:
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Chris... Thank you so much for posting that cartoon... that was the funniest thing I've seen in a long time:)
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Sorry for the late reply in this thread.
No one should give away our artist's work for free. In our case, the giveaway not only deprives the artist deserved revenue for his or her efforts, but the loss of the secret denies that forever.
I don't have practical suggestions at this point, but I'm adding my two-cents that we should fight any "I wanna" morality. To not do so legitimizes this bad behavior.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
No one should give away our artist's work for free. In our case, the giveaway not only deprives the artist deserved revenue for his or her efforts, but the loss of the secret denies that forever.
I don't have practical suggestions at this point, but I'm adding my two-cents that we should fight any "I wanna" morality. To not do so legitimizes this bad behavior.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
-
El Mystico
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa
- Contact:
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Brad;
You keep going on about mrgoat calling you a liar.
I work in the exciting world of advertising. There are some interesting lessons there worth sharing. Think about ads you have seen. Do you believe them all? Unlikely.Does that mean you think advertisers are liars? Probably not. It just means you are suspending your judgement until you have more evidence. A perfectly reasonable and common behaviour.
So when mrgoat wrote "However, have 'all' her friends stopped?" he wasn't calling you a liar. he was suspending his judgement.
I don't see a problem with that, and don't understand why you keep posting about it.
Also from the world of advertising - unless you work in it, you won't beleive how difficult it is to "prove" that an ad generated sales. There are so many other factors at play. Even asking people why they bought a brand is fraught with difficulties. In general, advertisers rely on looking at whether sales went up at the time of the advertising. It's not perfect, but it is often the best we have to go on. It seems to me there is a parallel here with mrgoat's argument.
To draw comparisons with anecdotal posts about what our teachers taught us is, to my thinking, a bit silly. The issue of how to limit the damage of piracy is a hugely important one for all creatives, so taking the right action is important. So gathering the right information for that decision is important. More important than whether my teacher did a perfect invisible pass (he was Fred Robinson, and he did, and fortunately it is captured on video, but never mind that now).
Within this context, there is also the question of how reliable is anecdotal evidence. Of course it has some value. But it can be unreliable. As a small example; to take your posts: you originally said "Has it stopped her and her friends...definitely." But your later posts refer to "many people in the University community here"; culminating in "a population (university students)". Do you see how your claim has grown?
For what it is worth, my view is that, yes, if you have been sued, you are likely to stop. But the vast majority haven't and won't be, so the publication of the website addresses is likely to increase piracy. Seems obvious to me, but there you go.
You keep going on about mrgoat calling you a liar.
I work in the exciting world of advertising. There are some interesting lessons there worth sharing. Think about ads you have seen. Do you believe them all? Unlikely.Does that mean you think advertisers are liars? Probably not. It just means you are suspending your judgement until you have more evidence. A perfectly reasonable and common behaviour.
So when mrgoat wrote "However, have 'all' her friends stopped?" he wasn't calling you a liar. he was suspending his judgement.
I don't see a problem with that, and don't understand why you keep posting about it.
Also from the world of advertising - unless you work in it, you won't beleive how difficult it is to "prove" that an ad generated sales. There are so many other factors at play. Even asking people why they bought a brand is fraught with difficulties. In general, advertisers rely on looking at whether sales went up at the time of the advertising. It's not perfect, but it is often the best we have to go on. It seems to me there is a parallel here with mrgoat's argument.
To draw comparisons with anecdotal posts about what our teachers taught us is, to my thinking, a bit silly. The issue of how to limit the damage of piracy is a hugely important one for all creatives, so taking the right action is important. So gathering the right information for that decision is important. More important than whether my teacher did a perfect invisible pass (he was Fred Robinson, and he did, and fortunately it is captured on video, but never mind that now).
Within this context, there is also the question of how reliable is anecdotal evidence. Of course it has some value. But it can be unreliable. As a small example; to take your posts: you originally said "Has it stopped her and her friends...definitely." But your later posts refer to "many people in the University community here"; culminating in "a population (university students)". Do you see how your claim has grown?
For what it is worth, my view is that, yes, if you have been sued, you are likely to stop. But the vast majority haven't and won't be, so the publication of the website addresses is likely to increase piracy. Seems obvious to me, but there you go.
-
Keith Raygor
- Posts: 101
- Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: Naples, FL
- Contact:
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
El Mystico wrote:People might know that mrgoat isn't my favourite person on this forum, but I cant help but feeling some sympathy for him here - don't shoot the messenger!
In the search for objectivity in an already passionate discussion, are you the same El Mystico that mrgoat claims as his uncle and mentor in magic? It would be helpful for me to know this in reasoning your post.
www.KeithTheMagician.com
www.TheMusicalMindreader.com
www.TheMusicalMindreader.com
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Brad Henderson wrote:Goat,
This is an important discussion as it speaks to the nature of discourse.
a) It's not important at all. It's you misinterpreting me and continuing to do so despite this being pointed out to you. Oh, and you calling me names.
b) This is a thread about piracy and how it can be stopped/slowed/dealt with. If you wish to have a discourse about discourse, I suggest you start a new thread on that subject.
-
Sue Anne Webster
- Posts: 37
- Joined: February 29th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Back to piracy for a minute...
On the site that James Clark hit, once the downloads were removed the members initially accepted it and thought it was a good thing as "all the leeches would leave the site".
A day or two later they were missing watching magic videos for free and they tried to come up with other ways to "share" their latest DVDs with each other. They recommended the usergroups and even suggested simply posting the explanations of all the latest tricks as text or making their own tutorial videos.
It's like they're trading magic secrets instead of baseball cards.
Anyway, yesterday the site disappeared. Apparently the ISP doesn't like hosting sites that breach copyright.
It's good to know we're not the only ones fighting.
Some might say we can't win the war against piracy. I can tell you for absolutely certainty that we won't win it, if we don't fight. In other words, if you don't take a stand against it, you're only making it harder for those of us that do.
On the site that James Clark hit, once the downloads were removed the members initially accepted it and thought it was a good thing as "all the leeches would leave the site".
A day or two later they were missing watching magic videos for free and they tried to come up with other ways to "share" their latest DVDs with each other. They recommended the usergroups and even suggested simply posting the explanations of all the latest tricks as text or making their own tutorial videos.
It's like they're trading magic secrets instead of baseball cards.
Anyway, yesterday the site disappeared. Apparently the ISP doesn't like hosting sites that breach copyright.
It's good to know we're not the only ones fighting.
Some might say we can't win the war against piracy. I can tell you for absolutely certainty that we won't win it, if we don't fight. In other words, if you don't take a stand against it, you're only making it harder for those of us that do.
Try our tasty new blog! http://www.magicunlimited.typepad.com
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Tim Ellis wrote:Some might say we can't win the war against piracy. I can tell you for absolutely certainty that we won't win it, if we don't fight. In other words, if you don't take a stand against it, you're only making it harder for those of us that do.
Can't see anyone suggesting we don't take a stand against it?
-
El Mystico
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa
- Contact:
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
In the search for objectivity in an already passionate discussion, are you the same El Mystico that mrgoat claims as his uncle and mentor in magic? It would be helpful for me to know this in reasoning your post. [/quote]
Keith - yes, I am mrgoat's uncle, and years ago I did mentor him. We aren't so close these days.
Keith - yes, I am mrgoat's uncle, and years ago I did mentor him. We aren't so close these days.
-
Keith Raygor
- Posts: 101
- Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: Naples, FL
- Contact:
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
mrgoat,
Because of the importance of this topic, at what may be a critical time in our art's development, I took the time and opportunity to peruse your blog in an effort to find context for your posts.
I found where you took pride in trolling ("I deliberately trolled this group to try and get the posts about something utterly unimportant above 100. I did!").
I read of your interest in magicians ("Magicians are tossers. Generally. They do stupid tricks and patronise their audience. They do stupid tricks with [censored] props and are annoying. They wear little flashing LED rabbit in hat badges and ties with cards on them and other horrible things. They are everything I hate. You cannot imagine how [censored] it is at a magic club or conference. All those annoying Uncle Nobbys in one room at once.").
I read the post in which you provide several links to your readers drawing attention to where they may download copy-protected material. ("Im sure you all know about Bit Torrent and its ability to download TV shows you may have missed, or new episodes of Lost from America. Clearly not *just* Lost. But anything you like. My Name is Earl for example. Actually these are just two shows I like. You may use BT to download anything your little heart desires.
NB: Do not, under any circumstances, use this information to download anything that is protected by copyright as that would be illegal. Use it for IPTV and free stuff you are allowed to download. So, I found this today. It explains how to automagically download your favourite TV shows using RSS and a torrent application. Bloody cool. Watch out broadcasters. Your days are so very numbered.")
You advertised the location of easily-accessible protected material, which is the very thing you admonished US creators about in your 2nd post in this thread.
Several pages back, you proclaimed: "My argument is if you find a way to really easily rob someone's house YOU SHOULDN'T POST INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO DO THAT ON THE INTERNET. And you shouldn't DISCUSS where to FIND instructions on how to rob someone's house. If you do this MORE HOUSES WILL BE ROBBED."
I'd felt that your answers have been unnecessarily and consistently one-sided in this discussion of piracy solutions, demonstrated by your question of the same 2nd post: "What could you do differently? How could you make people actually WANT to buy the physical product you sell?"
You seem to focus on how to make money off of the situation rather than solutions to stop the piracy. In that same post you said: "There really is nothing you can do about it. It has always been around and will always be around. Why fight battles you cannot win?".
I also see you are an expert in the dissemination of online information and marketing, and it is your chosen vocation. You may have a pony in this race that predisposes you to considering how to make money from the situation rather than stopping the criminality.
You've used much space here attempting to refute other's attempts at taking their chosen actions. In all of your posts, I've found one concrete anti-piracy suggestion from you: "Could there be a magic release that was 'free' to all, but with limited edition physical sets with extra physical 'things'."
I understand you are trying to raise questions (some would call it trolling due your uniform approach), but is it possible your expertise in the matters of online information could offer more positive ideas and attempts at solutions? We already understand how you feel about the actions of those taking action. What, specifically, would you do, given that you've so much to say about anti-piracy?
Because of the importance of this topic, at what may be a critical time in our art's development, I took the time and opportunity to peruse your blog in an effort to find context for your posts.
I found where you took pride in trolling ("I deliberately trolled this group to try and get the posts about something utterly unimportant above 100. I did!").
I read of your interest in magicians ("Magicians are tossers. Generally. They do stupid tricks and patronise their audience. They do stupid tricks with [censored] props and are annoying. They wear little flashing LED rabbit in hat badges and ties with cards on them and other horrible things. They are everything I hate. You cannot imagine how [censored] it is at a magic club or conference. All those annoying Uncle Nobbys in one room at once.").
I read the post in which you provide several links to your readers drawing attention to where they may download copy-protected material. ("Im sure you all know about Bit Torrent and its ability to download TV shows you may have missed, or new episodes of Lost from America. Clearly not *just* Lost. But anything you like. My Name is Earl for example. Actually these are just two shows I like. You may use BT to download anything your little heart desires.
NB: Do not, under any circumstances, use this information to download anything that is protected by copyright as that would be illegal. Use it for IPTV and free stuff you are allowed to download. So, I found this today. It explains how to automagically download your favourite TV shows using RSS and a torrent application. Bloody cool. Watch out broadcasters. Your days are so very numbered.")
You advertised the location of easily-accessible protected material, which is the very thing you admonished US creators about in your 2nd post in this thread.
Several pages back, you proclaimed: "My argument is if you find a way to really easily rob someone's house YOU SHOULDN'T POST INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO DO THAT ON THE INTERNET. And you shouldn't DISCUSS where to FIND instructions on how to rob someone's house. If you do this MORE HOUSES WILL BE ROBBED."
I'd felt that your answers have been unnecessarily and consistently one-sided in this discussion of piracy solutions, demonstrated by your question of the same 2nd post: "What could you do differently? How could you make people actually WANT to buy the physical product you sell?"
You seem to focus on how to make money off of the situation rather than solutions to stop the piracy. In that same post you said: "There really is nothing you can do about it. It has always been around and will always be around. Why fight battles you cannot win?".
I also see you are an expert in the dissemination of online information and marketing, and it is your chosen vocation. You may have a pony in this race that predisposes you to considering how to make money from the situation rather than stopping the criminality.
You've used much space here attempting to refute other's attempts at taking their chosen actions. In all of your posts, I've found one concrete anti-piracy suggestion from you: "Could there be a magic release that was 'free' to all, but with limited edition physical sets with extra physical 'things'."
I understand you are trying to raise questions (some would call it trolling due your uniform approach), but is it possible your expertise in the matters of online information could offer more positive ideas and attempts at solutions? We already understand how you feel about the actions of those taking action. What, specifically, would you do, given that you've so much to say about anti-piracy?
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Keith Raygor wrote:mrgoat,
Because of the importance of this topic, at what may be a critical time in our art's development, I took the time and opportunity to peruse your blog in an effort to find context for your posts.
Wow. You must be bored.
Keith Raygor wrote:I found where you took pride in trolling ("I deliberately trolled this group to try and get the posts about something utterly unimportant above 100. I did!").
Well done you! You break my copyright by posting here my words without my permission in a chat about breaking copyright! Smooth!
Keith Raygor wrote:I read of your interest in magicians ("Magicians are tossers. Generally. They do stupid tricks and patronise their audience. They do stupid tricks with [censored] props and are annoying. They wear little flashing LED rabbit in hat badges and ties with cards on them and other horrible things. They are everything I hate. You cannot imagine how [censored] it is at a magic club or conference. All those annoying Uncle Nobbys in one room at once.").
Yes. Magicians are tossers, generally.
Well done again! You are great at reading my blog. And printing bits of it here without my permission!
Keith Raygor wrote:I read the post in which you provide several links to your readers drawing attention to where they may download copy-protected material. ("Im sure you all know about Bit Torrent and its ability to download TV shows you may have missed, or new episodes of Lost from America. Clearly not *just* Lost. But anything you like. My Name is Earl for example. Actually these are just two shows I like. You may use BT to download anything your little heart desires.
NB: Do not, under any circumstances, use this information to download anything that is protected by copyright as that would be illegal. Use it for IPTV and free stuff you are allowed to download. So, I found this today. It explains how to automagically download your favourite TV shows using RSS and a torrent application. Bloody cool. Watch out broadcasters. Your days are so very numbered.")
Wow. You went back to Feb 2006 to try and find something bad about me? You really ARE bored.
See the bold bit? And what links do I provide? Oh to this chap who says:
I'll start by saying that I am a paying cable subscriber. Often times there are multiple shows on at the same time that I would like to watch and I wanted a way to be able to watch those other shows.
I clearly state to use it to watch legal bit torrent content. You do know Canada released a TV show on bit torrent, that lots of great IPTV shows RELY on bit torrent as they can't pay for the bandwidth, and all that is perfectly legal? Right?
Keith Raygor wrote:You advertised the location of easily-accessible protected material, which is the very thing you admonished US creators about in your 2nd post in this thread.
Citation needed. I didn't.
Keith Raygor wrote:Several pages back, you proclaimed: "My argument is if you find a way to really easily rob someone's house YOU SHOULDN'T POST INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO DO THAT ON THE INTERNET. And you shouldn't DISCUSS where to FIND instructions on how to rob someone's house. If you do this MORE HOUSES WILL BE ROBBED."
The post I made that you are referencing (not quoting I notice) says to use rss and bit torrent to download legal content. There is nothing wrong with that.
Keith Raygor wrote:I'd felt that your answers have been unnecessarily and consistently one-sided in this discussion of piracy solutions, demonstrated by your question of the same 2nd post: "What could you do differently? How could you make people actually WANT to buy the physical product you sell?"
Well I am sorry that my posts disappoint you. Please feel free not to read them.
Keith Raygor wrote:You seem to focus on how to make money off of the situation rather than solutions to stop the piracy. In that same post you said: "There really is nothing you can do about it. It has always been around and will always be around. Why fight battles you cannot win?".
Yes, you understand me perfectly. You will never stop bit torrent piracy. You can stop piracy where someone is hosting the content on a server though. So, I suggested trying workarounds (ie something undownloadable) that have proved successful in other fields.
Keith Raygor wrote:I also see you are an expert in the dissemination of online information and marketing, and it is your chosen vocation. You may have a pony in this race that predisposes you to considering how to make money from the situation rather than stopping the criminality.
Yes, I do marketing for websites that sell video content. Not sure how that is relevant?
Not sure what you are insinuating with all this pony talk. Of course I consider how to make money from the people that would have stolen the content of the sites I work for. Why woudn't I?
One of the things I am doing specifically for this is a true 1080p HD streaming video. Not a download, but a stream. Yes, it's possible to rip a stream, but it's harder. I don't think magic would work from that tactic, so I didn't share it.
Keith Raygor wrote:You've used much space here attempting to refute other's attempts at taking their chosen actions. In all of your posts, I've found one concrete anti-piracy suggestion from you: "Could there be a magic release that was 'free' to all, but with limited edition physical sets with extra physical 'things'."
The space is not about refuting other's attempts at taking their chosen actions. The bulk of the space is trying to get Brad to understand I wasn't calling him a liar. What a waste of time eh?
I also suggested the private mailing list group and offered to host and run that.
Keith Raygor wrote:I understand you are trying to raise questions (some would call it trolling due your uniform approach), but is it possible your expertise in the matters of online information could offer more positive ideas and attempts at solutions? We already understand how you feel about the actions of those taking action. What, specifically, would you do, given that you've so much to say about anti-piracy?
I don't troll here. If you had quoted me in full, I say:
"Clearly Usenet* is one end of the scale with utter mumless cocksnots arguing about nothing with strangers and the other is a great forum like Genii Magazines forum."
So this 'uniform' approach to trolling you claim I have is wrong. But most of your post is wrong too, so that's understandable.
As to your question (although why you want my opinion, as you clearly don't care for it, is beyond me)...
a) My views are on those that TALK about the action they are taking, not the action they are taking.
b) I have already posted two suggestions and offered to organise one of those for free although doing so will cost me money.
I am not an idea factory, sadly. At the moment, that's all I have got for you.
a) Make something undownloadable
b) Give a limited version of the product away for free to create hype and buzz, and sell a limited edition of the real version with extras you cannot get elsewhere.
Sorry that's not much, but it certainly is two things that worked for the music industry.
-
Keith Raygor
- Posts: 101
- Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: Naples, FL
- Contact:
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
mrgoat wrote:If you had quoted me in full, I say:
Yes, context is what was missing.
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Keith Raygor wrote:mrgoat wrote:If you had quoted me in full, I say:
Yes, context is what was missing.
Glad it makes more sense to you now.
So, let's re-rail this after your brief, and strange, voyage into my blog.
What ideas do you have to share with the group about how to combat magic video content piracy?
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Something else to think about from my world is that forming alliances with content producers does seem to have an positive effect. From a press release yesterday:
"The organization has retained legal counsel(s) who specialize in web pirating Intellectual Property litigation in regions of the world where the Co-Op discovered many of the illegal operators maintain operations. The legal team is acting on behalf of the consortium, strength in numbers being a strong factor in the partnership of the content holders and producers.
Said Crawford, Every day we speak with web sites, tube sites, and affiliate programs, who have knowingly or unknowingly displayed content that they do not have the rights for. We have discovered that some of them were misinformed and want to legally comply with the Co-Ops members to obtain legitimate licenses to resell the material. This year alone we have already taken down a total of 10,738 infringers, including: 5006 Movie file-sharing links, 2123 Picture file-sharing links and 3609 Blog posts."
Just another suggestion. Well, an extension of a previous suggestion really, with some proof that it can work.
"The organization has retained legal counsel(s) who specialize in web pirating Intellectual Property litigation in regions of the world where the Co-Op discovered many of the illegal operators maintain operations. The legal team is acting on behalf of the consortium, strength in numbers being a strong factor in the partnership of the content holders and producers.
Said Crawford, Every day we speak with web sites, tube sites, and affiliate programs, who have knowingly or unknowingly displayed content that they do not have the rights for. We have discovered that some of them were misinformed and want to legally comply with the Co-Ops members to obtain legitimate licenses to resell the material. This year alone we have already taken down a total of 10,738 infringers, including: 5006 Movie file-sharing links, 2123 Picture file-sharing links and 3609 Blog posts."
Just another suggestion. Well, an extension of a previous suggestion really, with some proof that it can work.
-
El Mystico
- Posts: 1088
- Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: Leamington Spa
- Contact:
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
There is something else that occurs to me here. Don't know how relevant it is though. I've known three people who have library of illegal copies. All three had not bothered to watch the majority of their material.
In my mind, that links wih something my brother once told me. He was involved in an aid programme in Africa. To counter deforestation, they planted trees. but this was unsuccessful, because no one locally took responsibilty for them. However, selling the trees - at a stupid price, like a cent - meant people took responsibilty for their own trees, and took care of them.
It was like - if it was free, it had no value to them - but if they paid for it, it did have value.
I don't know how far these two can be equated, but maybe it is food for thought.
(For clarity; I am NOT saying - therefore illegal downloading is OK!)
In my mind, that links wih something my brother once told me. He was involved in an aid programme in Africa. To counter deforestation, they planted trees. but this was unsuccessful, because no one locally took responsibilty for them. However, selling the trees - at a stupid price, like a cent - meant people took responsibilty for their own trees, and took care of them.
It was like - if it was free, it had no value to them - but if they paid for it, it did have value.
I don't know how far these two can be equated, but maybe it is food for thought.
(For clarity; I am NOT saying - therefore illegal downloading is OK!)
-
Brad Henderson
- Posts: 4550
- Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: austin, tx
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Excellent deflection Goat. I'm glad those horns come in handy.
Seems to me that if we base our realities solely on the words/beliefs of those we personally know, then it becomes very easy to deafen ourselves to the cries of artists and content producers who claim they have been damaged by online theft. After all, you don't know them, so why should you believe that an illegal download has hurt them in any way?
Is this that far removed from the position of the youth who download the material? It doesn't hurt anybody (at least nobody they know). (Heck, you could probably use a nice objective chart to prove that the downloading helped the artists by turning them on to their work!)Clearly illegal downloading HELPS those who engage in it as they have access to material and keep money in their pocket. In the egocentric world where no one's experience is given legitimacy except your own, it's hard not to steal. If someone happens to claim they were hurt by your actions, and you don't know them personally, they can be dismissed.
I think common courtesy and respect would probably go further in squelching this issue than any lawsuit.
But we see clearly how rare that is these days.
Brad
Seems to me that if we base our realities solely on the words/beliefs of those we personally know, then it becomes very easy to deafen ourselves to the cries of artists and content producers who claim they have been damaged by online theft. After all, you don't know them, so why should you believe that an illegal download has hurt them in any way?
Is this that far removed from the position of the youth who download the material? It doesn't hurt anybody (at least nobody they know). (Heck, you could probably use a nice objective chart to prove that the downloading helped the artists by turning them on to their work!)Clearly illegal downloading HELPS those who engage in it as they have access to material and keep money in their pocket. In the egocentric world where no one's experience is given legitimacy except your own, it's hard not to steal. If someone happens to claim they were hurt by your actions, and you don't know them personally, they can be dismissed.
I think common courtesy and respect would probably go further in squelching this issue than any lawsuit.
But we see clearly how rare that is these days.
Brad
Brad Henderson magician in Austin Texas
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Brad Henderson wrote:I think common courtesy and respect would probably go further in squelching this issue than any lawsuit.
But we see clearly how rare that is these days.
Oh come on. You're trolling me aren't you? That is just too easy. I quote you above, then quote all the times you have shown no courtesy and no respect. And go "Ahahahah you see! You want courtesy and yet you call me names"
That's too obvious. I've rumbled you.
-
Brad Henderson
- Posts: 4550
- Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: austin, tx
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
For someone whose statements imply and state that this part of the discussion is so unimportant, so stupid, you seem to be very intense in participating.
As to courtesy and respect, your posts speak for themselves.
Brad
As to courtesy and respect, your posts speak for themselves.
Brad
Brad Henderson magician in Austin Texas
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Brad Henderson wrote:For someone whose statements imply and state that this part of the discussion is so unimportant, so stupid, you seem to be very intense in participating.
As to courtesy and respect, your posts speak for themselves.
Brad
I have realised you are trolling me, and you are right, this is of no interest to anyone. So I will ignore you now. My astounding Kreskin like predictions are as follows:
You will now post something inflammatory trying to get me to respond, which I won't do. Tomorrow, you will probably try the same tactic, on an unrelated thread. Then repeat that about once a week.
Hats off to you. It took me until two posts ago to be sure you were just trolling. You had me for a while, well done.
-
Sue Anne Webster
- Posts: 37
- Joined: February 29th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Could you three please create your own thread if you don't want to discuss the closure of an exposure website by James Clark.
Try our tasty new blog! http://www.magicunlimited.typepad.com
-
Brad Henderson
- Posts: 4550
- Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
- Location: austin, tx
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
How about this:
For those who think the lawsuits have no affect or impact I can attest that at least at a local level they do. A friend of mine was sued by the RIAA. It cost her far more money than she had to spend and, at least according to what she told me (admittedly I did not have her hooked up to the lie detector at the time), she is no longer taking the risk of downloading music. She also related to me that given the rash of these lawsuits on campus, that people are scared and they are not taking it lightly.
I hope some people find this an interesting contribution to the topic specifically as it relates to the impact of the lawsuits. I realize the lawsuits may also have other consequences that work to their detriment, but to dismiss their effect on individuals and their behaviors would be fool hardy - even if you do not know them personally.
Hopefully this contribution will be accepted with respect and consideration.
Call me a wishful thinker,
Brad
For those who think the lawsuits have no affect or impact I can attest that at least at a local level they do. A friend of mine was sued by the RIAA. It cost her far more money than she had to spend and, at least according to what she told me (admittedly I did not have her hooked up to the lie detector at the time), she is no longer taking the risk of downloading music. She also related to me that given the rash of these lawsuits on campus, that people are scared and they are not taking it lightly.
I hope some people find this an interesting contribution to the topic specifically as it relates to the impact of the lawsuits. I realize the lawsuits may also have other consequences that work to their detriment, but to dismiss their effect on individuals and their behaviors would be fool hardy - even if you do not know them personally.
Hopefully this contribution will be accepted with respect and consideration.
Call me a wishful thinker,
Brad
Brad Henderson magician in Austin Texas
-
joshua barrett
- Posts: 16
- Joined: April 28th, 2008, 12:23 pm
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
way to go james, i will be looking forward to hear more about your progress
Re: One exposure site feels the pain...
Hello,
Some of you may or may not know me. Some of you probably hate me (which is your own opinion and deserve that to the fullest). It took me some time to read this thread and analyze everyone's opinions, ideas, and outlooks.
What I say probably won't mean much to any of you but I felt obligated to post here.
I am the administrator, and still currently, of the site you all love to hate. We are a magic community devoted to sharing. Now, I'm not trying to make an 'advertisement' or anything on those lines, I am here to clear things up. Some facts have been skewed and I enjoy people knowing the truth.
James L. Clark is anything but a rogue anti-piracy person. I humbly accepted him into my community and treated him as I would any other member. He donated and contributed to the community as every other member did. This means, yes, he downloaded magic for free. His methods of tracking me down were old and outdated data-mining (Googling all my info he could find). I made the mistake of ordering his product and he cross-referenced his orders and put two things together and called me.
I am not 'some kid', I am a college educated student working on MBA. I agreed to remove my site for simplicity. Not so much the 'threat' of lawsuits, or the FBI knocking at my door. It was the pure fact that I did not have the time to take this task on any longer.
After a few days went by we swapped servers to speed things up (this is where Tim Ellis thought the site went down). It is actually still up and running with strong conversation. We are on a path to still contribute to the less-fortunate people, but in a different way.
About two weeks passed when I received an email from one of my users stating that I was in a recent Podcast on Itricks. As I listened to the Podcast I was flabbergasted on the things mentioned about my site. James L. Clark ranted about how rude I was, how I did not do this, and how he had already taken down 3 other sites. None of this could be more incorrect. I would love to address these in a simplistic breakdown.
Q.) Was I rude to Mr. Clark?
-Absolutely not, I was more the gallant with him. I made sure I was very polite and sincere with my replies. I said nothing rude until he started raising his voice at me and calling me quite a few profane words (which I have the full conversation on audio).
Q.) Did you follow Mr. Clark's requests?
-Yes, I actually would call them demands. I did everything he asked, yet he still felt as if I owed him something.
Q.) Who are you?
-I am a young motivated individual currently finishing off my MBA in business management.
Q.) Why did you 'rat the other sites out like a crack head rolling over'?
-Funny thing is the site I "rolled over" on was praising my site got hit hard. They said a lot of rude things that where completely unnecessary. This is all after I donated money so they could keep their site up. I don't enjoy being stepped on, so I gladly handed over the site owner's personal information to Mr. Clark. All he did is make a call to the student, nothing more nothing less.
Q.) Whats this 18,000 member site Mr. Clark rants about in the Podcast?
-Not sure, me and my users listened to it in-depth and feel that James was trying to put himself on a pedestal. He made sure he made it known that he had a large vocabulary and emphasized all his words. Hate to say it but it was only a mere 1,000 user base site that he was able to take out. Which was mine. He simply lied in the Podcast.
I know it's long, and probably not one of the most well-thought-out replies I have written, but I am extremley tired and overloaded this week. If you have any questions feel free to private message me via GeniiMagazine.
Always Polite and Sincere,
Exo
Some of you may or may not know me. Some of you probably hate me (which is your own opinion and deserve that to the fullest). It took me some time to read this thread and analyze everyone's opinions, ideas, and outlooks.
What I say probably won't mean much to any of you but I felt obligated to post here.
I am the administrator, and still currently, of the site you all love to hate. We are a magic community devoted to sharing. Now, I'm not trying to make an 'advertisement' or anything on those lines, I am here to clear things up. Some facts have been skewed and I enjoy people knowing the truth.
James L. Clark is anything but a rogue anti-piracy person. I humbly accepted him into my community and treated him as I would any other member. He donated and contributed to the community as every other member did. This means, yes, he downloaded magic for free. His methods of tracking me down were old and outdated data-mining (Googling all my info he could find). I made the mistake of ordering his product and he cross-referenced his orders and put two things together and called me.
I am not 'some kid', I am a college educated student working on MBA. I agreed to remove my site for simplicity. Not so much the 'threat' of lawsuits, or the FBI knocking at my door. It was the pure fact that I did not have the time to take this task on any longer.
After a few days went by we swapped servers to speed things up (this is where Tim Ellis thought the site went down). It is actually still up and running with strong conversation. We are on a path to still contribute to the less-fortunate people, but in a different way.
About two weeks passed when I received an email from one of my users stating that I was in a recent Podcast on Itricks. As I listened to the Podcast I was flabbergasted on the things mentioned about my site. James L. Clark ranted about how rude I was, how I did not do this, and how he had already taken down 3 other sites. None of this could be more incorrect. I would love to address these in a simplistic breakdown.
Q.) Was I rude to Mr. Clark?
-Absolutely not, I was more the gallant with him. I made sure I was very polite and sincere with my replies. I said nothing rude until he started raising his voice at me and calling me quite a few profane words (which I have the full conversation on audio).
Q.) Did you follow Mr. Clark's requests?
-Yes, I actually would call them demands. I did everything he asked, yet he still felt as if I owed him something.
Q.) Who are you?
-I am a young motivated individual currently finishing off my MBA in business management.
Q.) Why did you 'rat the other sites out like a crack head rolling over'?
-Funny thing is the site I "rolled over" on was praising my site got hit hard. They said a lot of rude things that where completely unnecessary. This is all after I donated money so they could keep their site up. I don't enjoy being stepped on, so I gladly handed over the site owner's personal information to Mr. Clark. All he did is make a call to the student, nothing more nothing less.
Q.) Whats this 18,000 member site Mr. Clark rants about in the Podcast?
-Not sure, me and my users listened to it in-depth and feel that James was trying to put himself on a pedestal. He made sure he made it known that he had a large vocabulary and emphasized all his words. Hate to say it but it was only a mere 1,000 user base site that he was able to take out. Which was mine. He simply lied in the Podcast.
I know it's long, and probably not one of the most well-thought-out replies I have written, but I am extremley tired and overloaded this week. If you have any questions feel free to private message me via GeniiMagazine.
Always Polite and Sincere,
Exo