The Pompey Chimes Forum

Wimbledon Blue wrote:I'm not a fan of Sky but Sky pay a lot of money for these rights, they are a subscription based channel whose one goal is to drive subscriptions, why should they allow their content to be shown on rival platforms?

Because it's monopolistic. And if it were any other industry people would be up in arms.

This can't be right.

From that above article:

The Grauniad wrote: Virtually the entire audience watches/listens live on transmission, on whatever piece of machinery.

Other than sport and news, everything we watch is pre-recorded....

ddavis wrote:

Wimbledon Blue wrote:I'm not a fan of Sky but Sky pay a lot of money for these rights, they are a subscription based channel whose one goal is to drive subscriptions, why should they allow their content to be shown on rival platforms?

Because it's monopolistic. And if it were any other industry people would be up in arms.

Now this is an interesting concept - there has to be rewards for risks (even with indirect state support, this was genuinely risky) but when does it become anticompetitive enough to warrant intervention? Also who's jurisdiction is this - UK or EU?

Its not US or European piracy thats the real problem (although thats not to say it doesn't exist). The problem lies in China and India where copyright and international patents mean f-all. Or at least to a point where they realise the West is largely toothless to counter it.

The threat usually boils down to 'Oy, China - stop this copyright abuse or or we won't sell you the $40billion dollars worth of Boeing and Airbus planes we're telling you you need. We don't need your business...oh, can we order another 5 years worth of textiles at p1ss-cheap rates again?'

If Hollywood actually started making films again because they were good stories, and not just rehashes aimed at as many international markets as possible, I'd have a lot more sympathy. Last year there were 27 sequels. Of which only 9 were 2nd films. This isn't about loss of business, this is about loss of profit by mega-corporations. I realise independent films are struggling too, but its not because of piracy, its because the studios aren't interested in backing them in the first place.

Miss Tickle's bottom wrote:

HappyHour@TheBreweryOfLife wrote:If you steal from many, it's 'Research'.
If you steal from one, it's 'Plagiarism'.

Are you seriously suggesting that LIKW is not allowed to read things and then form an opinion?

You're barmy.

He is - I wonder why he has gotten so hooked on this since he started his education course?

HappyHour@TheBreweryOfLife wrote:This can't be right.

From that above article:

The Grauniad wrote: Virtually the entire audience watches/listens live on transmission, on whatever piece of machinery.

Other than sport and news, everything we watch is pre-recorded....

So you've found an article which shares LIKW's viewpoint, from January (!), decided he plagiarised it, and you're now criticising the article?

You're even barmier than I thought!

Weybridge wrote: If Hollywood actually started making films again because they were good stories, and not just rehashes aimed at as many international markets as possible, I'd have a lot more sympathy. Last year there were 27 sequels. Of which only 9 were 2nd films. This isn't about loss of business, this is about loss of profit by mega-corporations. I realise independent films are struggling too, but its not because of piracy, its because the studios aren't interested in backing them in the first place.

I like this.

Evil Overlord Chainrai wrote:

Weybridge wrote: If Hollywood actually started making films again because they were good stories, and not just rehashes aimed at as many international markets as possible, I'd have a lot more sympathy. Last year there were 27 sequels. Of which only 9 were 2nd films. This isn't about loss of business, this is about loss of profit by mega-corporations. I realise independent films are struggling too, but its not because of piracy, its because the studios aren't interested in backing them in the first place.

I like this.

Lost in Kate's Tinsel wrote:Now this is an interesting concept - there has to be rewards for risks (even with indirect state support, this was genuinely risky) but when does it become anticompetitive enough to warrant intervention? Also who's jurisdiction is this - UK or EU?

They can still be rewarded.

Sky Atlantic, as an example.

VM could charge £9.95 for it as an extra channel, then customers would have a choice. Sure, it's cheaper at Sky (but the rest of the package isn't), but customers have the option.

At present there is no option because Sky won't even enter into dialogue over pricing.

Lost in Kate's Tinsel wrote:

Evil Overlord Chainrai wrote:

Weybridge wrote: If Hollywood actually started making films again because they were good stories, and not just rehashes aimed at as many international markets as possible, I'd have a lot more sympathy. Last year there were 27 sequels. Of which only 9 were 2nd films. This isn't about loss of business, this is about loss of profit by mega-corporations. I realise independent films are struggling too, but its not because of piracy, its because the studios aren't interested in backing them in the first place.

I like this.

You'd be surprised at how many independent films are pirated also, i was in Fuengirola 2 weeks ago, business not pleasure, and I was approached by a 'looky looky' boy, in his bag he had 6 of my films from the last year in amongst the usual Hollywood blockbusters

Lost in Kate's Tinsel wrote:

ddavis wrote:

Wimbledon Blue wrote:I'm not a fan of Sky but Sky pay a lot of money for these rights, they are a subscription based channel whose one goal is to drive subscriptions, why should they allow their content to be shown on rival platforms?

Because it's monopolistic. And if it were any other industry people would be up in arms.

Now this is an interesting concept - there has to be rewards for risks (even with indirect state support, this was genuinely risky) but when does it become anticompetitive enough to warrant intervention? Also who's jurisdiction is this - UK or EU?

Very interesting, at what point does start to be punished for being successful and just better than the rest?
Televised football before SKY was very poor, they invested heavily in it and lost considerable sums of money for many years before reaping the benefits.

Wimbledon Blue wrote:You'd be surprised at how many independent films are pirated also, i was in Fuengirola 2 weeks ago, business not pleasure, and I was approached by a 'looky looky' boy, in his bag he had 6 of my films from the last year in amongst the usual Hollywood blockbusters

If he didn't have them, how many more sales would you have had from the Fuengirola region?

That's the question that needs to be asked.

Computer Game piracy is a far bigger issue, but it's overlooked. And that genuinely is affecting British industry.

ddavis wrote:

Wimbledon Blue wrote:You'd be surprised at how many independent films are pirated also, i was in Fuengirola 2 weeks ago, business not pleasure, and I was approached by a 'looky looky' boy, in his bag he had 6 of my films from the last year in amongst the usual Hollywood blockbusters

If he didn't have them, how many more sales would you have had from the Fuengirola region?

That's the question that needs to be asked.

Computer Game piracy is a far bigger issue, but it's overlooked. And that genuinely is affecting British industry.

The bigger issue is who are these gangs working for and where does the revenue go, under what pressures are these guys under.
Piracy in Spain is rife, many big studios refuse to even operate there.

Wimbledon Blue wrote:

ddavis wrote:

Wimbledon Blue wrote:You'd be surprised at how many independent films are pirated also, i was in Fuengirola 2 weeks ago, business not pleasure, and I was approached by a 'looky looky' boy, in his bag he had 6 of my films from the last year in amongst the usual Hollywood blockbusters

If he didn't have them, how many more sales would you have had from the Fuengirola region?

That's the question that needs to be asked.

Computer Game piracy is a far bigger issue, but it's overlooked. And that genuinely is affecting British industry.

The bigger issue is who are these gangs working for and where does the revenue go, under what pressures are these guys under.

Medium and large-scale organised crime and many of the peddlers are illegal immigrants working off their transport fees (however, they will feel very lucky that they aren't women).

Lost in Kate's Tinsel wrote:

Evil Overlord Chainrai wrote:

Weybridge wrote: If Hollywood actually started making films again because they were good stories, and not just rehashes aimed at as many international markets as possible, I'd have a lot more sympathy. Last year there were 27 sequels. Of which only 9 were 2nd films. This isn't about loss of business, this is about loss of profit by mega-corporations. I realise independent films are struggling too, but its not because of piracy, its because the studios aren't interested in backing them in the first place.

I like this.

Thirded .