Hacker News Reader

Comment by pothibo | Hacker News Reader

What a narrow view you have. Torrent makes it accessible to see things you have paid for but didn't have time/forgot to watch (TV series). They also make it accessible to get stuff you couldn't (Not because it's available in USA that it is in every country).

That's crazy that someone went to jail for running TPB when the MPAA and RIAA are big monopolies that control how much we should spend on stuff. It's not a free market. Get your head out of the sand.

The only reason the iTunes model has come to exist is because of torrents and illegal sharing.

And people (myself included) buy a lot of stuff from the iTunes Store now.

Netflix exists because of illegal sharing. And even though Netflix is pretty awesome, look at what all the established companies are doing to try to screw with Netflix.

Such a narrow view.

View on HN

>Netflix exists because of illegal sharing. And even though Netflix is pretty awesome, look at what all the established companies are doing to try to screw with Netflix.

And let us not forget that Netflix is still unavailable in many countries (pick any Eastern European Country, EU countries included). And where it is available, many titles from the US Netflix are not available. Torrents (and illegal downloads in general) are a strong incentive for copyright owners to improve their game. Otherwise it'd be a stagnant monopoly.

> Torrents (and illegal downloads in general) are a strong incentive for copyright owners to improve their game. Otherwise it'd be a stagnant monopoly.

I'm not sure breaking the law (whether you agree with it or not) is the proper way to fight monopoly (?) or to push companies to "improve their game".

Btw, there is no monopoly in the music or gaming industry (not that I know of, at least). There are laws for monopoly issues.

It's "breaking the law" in the same way that violating the speed limit to keep up with the flow of traffic is "breaking the law". The laws we're comparing have some interesting parallels too:

    * Usually they're way too strict given the conditions
    * They're not re-evaluated often enough
    * Their usefulness in modern society is debatable
    * Both are often not used for their original purpose
    * The consequences for breaking them are usually minimal, unless you're being flagrant, or:
    * The enforcers sometimes choose to crack down and make an example out of you, despite the fact that:
    * The supposed harm caused by disregarding them is dubious, and in fact:
    * Arguments can be made that disregarding them is a net positive
    * People who outsource their moral compasses to the legal system usually choose one of these to demonize people for (ignoring that obedience to law isn't an inherently noble thing)
    * Said people also usually compare the law to something it's not. (YOU'RE LITERALLY ENDANGERING CHILDREN/YOU'RE LITERALLY STEALING)

> I'm not sure breaking the law (whether you agree with it or not) is the proper way to fight monopoly (?) or to push companies to "improve their game".

Its a rather common approach when the monopoly you are concerned about effectively controls the relevant area of law.

In such an unfair fight, i'd argue it's the BEST method.

>>The only reason the iTunes model has come to exist is because of torrents and illegal sharing.

TPB is popular because Netflix is still budding. Had Netflix/iTunes been around in the late 90's I doubt file sharing services like Napster would have been half as popular. I dont believe people who have the means to pay for media desire to steal.

The fact is the market failed to keep up with consumer demand.

If you examine how TiVo came to be you will see the main concept is "TV on your schedule". Netflix services this need in a much simpler manner.

Are you saying that people that download the latest version of X TV show all have a cable subscription that includes that show? That, I would say, is completely incorrect.

Way to put words into my mouth.

I said makes it accessible.

I didn't put words in your mouth, I asked you if what you meant was that 100% of people that downloaded the latest episode of Homeland pay for it through their cable subscription. The cable companies also provide ways for you to record the TV you pay for, I don't agree that torrents should serve that purpose.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com