http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/ Engadget Comments for 85 percent of the 14 billion videos downloaded last year were illegal http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 7th 2009 8:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 3:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/"most people are opting to obtain content illegally BECAUSE of the ridiculous DRM on digital downloads"

Does the report really assert that it's the DRM which causes people to break the law? I don't see that stated anywhere in the read link...only that 'failing to improve the user experience of DRM might increase illegal download rates.'

I do despise DRM (and the implication that customers are criminals), but it often seems that people just use it as an excuse to justify their behaviour...behaviour which does in fact make them criminals. I would guess that a significant number of those illegal downloaders simply don't want to pay for the content, while another significant number just can't be bothered with the perceived hassle of obtaining media through official channels.


]]>Jul 8th 2009 5:57AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 8:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 9:15AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 9:41AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
"Property of Warner Bros. For Emmy Consideration Only"]]>Jul 7th 2009 8:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 7th 2009 11:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 7th 2009 9:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
http://www.homemediamagazine.com/streaming/show-me-money-analysts-sour-streaming-16134

Also it is very easy to pirate a video stream. If it is being sent to you and being processed by your computer a program can be written to copy. This may take time to do but someone always comes up with a way around it. (unfortunately for the the studios and people like me who invest in the studios)

These digital media are supposed to come into play in 2015 by some accounts and investors will tire of waiting till then and have moved on by that date.]]>Jul 8th 2009 12:59PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
...... and yet some people turn up here to keep preaching that a physical product is the only way and that the internet is far too slow and capped to make digital distribution a serious prospect for movie distribution?!

LMAO

14 billion last year, how many billion this year?
(esp. given the usual incremental speed increases and ever more sharing & retailing services etc etc).

The idea that you can stop this is stupid in the extreme.
When something goes digital that's it, you lose control over it.
Get over it.
An entire generation has grown up expecting everything on the net to be free - or at least offering a free version of it.

The only serious prospect of recovering that kind of control is to offer the potential customer the stuff that can't be had for free, the added value stuff that would make the consumer want to buy and keep the 'full' product and explore it fully and not just give the free version a single run-through.
But that requires a quality product, some imagination and a few extra pennies in costs.

So I guess they'll keep up the King Canute act trying to pretend that a piffling breach of copyright is akin to murder and a serious criminal offfense and attacking their potential customer base instead of engaging with us.]]>Jul 7th 2009 10:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
People appear to be willing to spend hours downloading a movie _for_free_. Are they willing to pay for it? ]]>Jul 8th 2009 11:10AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
I doubt I am far from alone in being able to honestly say that I have bought literally several hundred retail DVDs after 'trying before buying'.

I can also point to well over 100 HD DVDs & Blu-rays bought on the same basis.
I wanted the HD audio and I was not prepared to d/l 20gb - 44gbs to get it, so I bought the retail disks
(although always at a heavily discount price, never the ridiculously excessive release price).

This I think is part of the fallacy regarding sharing.
It does not lead to a loss of sales, it generates many sales.
If the movie was not available free no-one would bother buying it anyway, so there was never any prospect of a sale to have been lost.
But it does though mean that cr@p would still never be bought, either way.

The plain fact is 'intellectual property' is nothing like the same as physical property so the notion that sharing is identical to theft is just laughable.
Copyright law is being pushed in an insane direction which can only end up harming our society even if the corporations are convinced it is in their interests to monetise everything possible.

If the day ever came when sharing was stopped I would not just start buying a stack of movies sight unseen.
I would just stop bothering with so many movies and start only go for the small number of ones I am especially interested in and know something about .
Their loss through their greedy short-sighted stupidity.
I'd just enjoy the hundreds of movies I already have and ease off this a/v hobby.]]>Jul 8th 2009 1:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
Part of the reason (perhaps the reason) Blu-ray survived the BD-HD DVD "fight" was that certain major studios, Fox in particular, wanted levels of DRM that go beyond absurd and refused to have anything to do with HD DVD as it only supported the "minimum" (which was already pretty bad, AACS + HDCP, though with neither forced upon content owners.)

Blu-ray added BD+, and made AACS use mandatory, and so Fox stuck with it and refused to switch, and supposedly that's why the DVD Forum was unable to get more support at the critical moment when Warner was chosing between one or the other and was willing to go HD DVD exclusive if the DVD Forum could persuade one other studio to join.

If DRM sunk HD DVD, imagine what the chances are of it being removed from online download schemes, where the content is, by definition, already in a format easily distributed over the internet. You've just described Fox's and Sony's worst nightmare.

And yes, it's stupid, DRM doesn't work, people upload DVDs and BDs as fast as they can buy them, while the systems just cause problems for legitimate owners who find their playback options limited and, in BD+'s case, unpredictable. But Fox et al knew this ten years ago. They knew it five years ago. They knew it in January 2008. They're ignoring what they know and sticking with their guts, and so it's going to be many years, decades perhaps, before we see any sanity in this area.
]]>Jul 7th 2009 10:37PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/I have bought many videos legally on itunes and amazon.
However, since these videos are "broken" due to drm, the only place I can find functional replacements is torrents.

I pay for my content, but if it doesn't work like I want it, I can fix that.

Same with Blurays. I consider DRM'd discs broken as they don't always play. I own about 200 of these broken discs now, but thanks to AnyDVD, I can fix those too!]]>Jul 7th 2009 10:49PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
On the opinion that DRM is ineffective and more of a pain to customers who are legally purchasing videos than to people who are obtaining videos illegally - I am in total agreement with that. But to outright state that, "because of the ridiculous DRM on digital downloads, most people are opting to obtain content illegally" and not even mention PRICE as a potential reason is just plain irresponsible as a journalist.

I expect better from Engadget.]]>Jul 7th 2009 11:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
a) Stop stiffing people with prices which are close to retail physical prices. People can't sell or lend their copies so the price should be cheaper. Distribution is cheaper so the price should be cheaper. The cheaper it is, the less piracy there will be.

b) Implement a common file format, delivery and DRM platform, one that all players and all stores can implement. Stop thinking that proprietary services from Apple, Amazon, Sony, Microsoft etc. etc. are what people want because it isn't. People want a format which plays on any player, not a select handful. People want files they can transfer between devices or back up without major hassle. Proprietary is only acceptable for rental & streaming. It's not acceptable for ownership. A common platform also opens up proper transparent competition allowing stores to apply their own discounts to a).

Of course the industry could continue down the path they're on. And in a few years they'll still be wondering why people are downloading stuff for free rather than tying themselves into the proprietary services.]]>Jul 8th 2009 5:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
Sorry, i was so incensed that I shat out a post almost identical to yours before reading this far into the comments. That'll teach me. I totally agree with you.

Xym:

According to some marketing guy (who may or may not be right), customers judge a product's value as:
value = benefit - effort - risk - price
Obviously, they will then 'purchase' the offering with the highest value (perhaps there should be some consideration of 'ethicalness' in this equation?)

Both legitimate and illegitimate options have the same main benefit (i.e. getting to watch a film). P2P wins on price. Legal downloading currently seems to involve serious effort, and evidently some risk that content won't play (according to another commenter). If the industry wants to attract customers, it needs to make its offering more attractive by reducing risk, reducing effort (your point b), reducing price (your point a) or increasing benefit.

I'm sure you guys can come up with plenty of other ways in which they could do this, but if they continue to present a low-value offering enforced with legislation, people are only going to get pissed off.]]>Jul 8th 2009 6:17AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
I would gladly pay for my movies, but:

-I want good quality. I'm not exactly rich, an HDTV was a big "investment" for me and I want to max it out. This obviously rules out streaming. Only P2P offers high-quality rips (or even original images of the media), and I really don't mind waiting 3 or 4 days while it downloads.

-It must be playable on whatever device I want it. I don't always watch my stuff on the TV. This rules out anything with DRM, which is pretty much everything. With P2P-downloaded movies it goes hassle-free.

-On P2P the selection is very wide, and there's always something in my language. If there's not, it's trivial to add subtitles. The paid service must be at least comparable to this.

-I must be able to pay for it. I live in Mexico, and I can't buy anything online because no "screwing" online store takes international credit cards (even when I'm paying through PayPal).
Kinda defeats the point of being online and having international cards and using PayPal, doesn't it?

Physical media might be an option for more wealthy people, but not happening here. Movies alone are too expensive, players even more, and to watch it on other devices I'd have to rip it, which means buying another expensive device (and breaking the rules in the process anyway).]]>Jul 8th 2009 2:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 7th 2009 11:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 12:26AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 3:57AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
If you don't like what something costs, or how it is sold, then do without it. Simple!]]>Jul 8th 2009 6:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
"Instead of paying for cable, we shall watch clouds!"

I download copies of movies I own because I don't want to spend my time ripping them; I already paid for them. I download tv shows I've paid for via cable tv/DVD so I can archive them and play them in my media center without wasting all the time and $ (electricity) it costs to reencode them. I've actually bought 4 different bluray movies because I downloaded them and liked them. I'm not going to go spend $40 to find out it sucks.

If they would give me an uncomprimised .MKV with all my purchases for free download from their servers that went as fast as a good torrent, I'd never have reason to "pirate" again.

Don't be such a prude.]]>Jul 8th 2009 10:44AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
I agree with all your points, except for the "try before you buy" concept. That's what reviews and rentals are for.]]>Jul 8th 2009 11:07AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 9:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 9:50AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 10:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 10:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 10:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
I know its a business.
But when and artist makes 50 million an album and the record company pulls in 50 million.
I can spend my money some where else.

Thanks to pandora and myspace i have all the songs i need. ]]>Jul 8th 2009 10:59AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
While I hate commercials, I understand that they need them, so if the only "DRM" was an error-correcting scheme that prevented editing of the video, AND downloading was fairly easy AND the copy was permanent AND of broadcast quality ... then I'd favor that over torrents and the like.

But special viewers OR timed copies OR fees OR streaming-only are non-starters for something that ANYONE can easily copy and put up on the net. TV is quite different from movies in that regard.]]>Jul 8th 2009 11:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 11:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
I don't think we'll see the studios push to drop the prices on downloads; it will cheapen the expected value of the product at a time when they're hurting for revenue, and I don't think the costs of making and distributing discs is a significant share of the price tag as downloaders seem to think. ]]>Jul 8th 2009 11:21AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 12:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 12:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
What kind of liability are you accepting by possessing watermarked media? If your watermarked media escapes without your consent, are you guilty until proven innocent? Hard to prove you didn't do something.


]]>Jul 8th 2009 12:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
Um no, its because its free.]]>Jul 8th 2009 12:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
It doesn't come down to DRM, it comes down to inflated price vs. free. RIAA, MPA and software companies have forever stated that prices are set to offset piracy. What a line of crap. There will always be those that will pirate, but there would be a lot less if this stuff was reasonably priced, esp for digital downloads where manufacturing costs are ZERO.

Seriously, sell me a Blu-Ray movie for $10. I'll pay for the bandwidth to download it and the hard drive to store it on or the blu-ray burner to burn the disc. Same thing with music albums. $1.30 for a song? wth, make it $.20 and you've got a deal. Hell, I'll buy the whole album for $3 everytime. You'll find that people are much more willing to get nickel and dimed than hit with a big fat one off price.

Cut the price by 3/4, watch sales go through the roof. But of course don't expect to see that ever, that would make too much sense.]]>Jul 8th 2009 12:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 1:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
This stuff isn't priced well for the average consumer, period. People only set aside so much for entertainment expenses.

One scenario: Say you set aside $50 a month for movie entertainment. You purchase 2 movies at $20 each. You have $10 left, not enough for an additional movie. What happens to the other $10? Probably just goes to something totally unrelated.

Now say those movies are $10 each. You're more likely to buy 5 movies, using all of your budgeted money. How in this scenario does the movie industry lose? Yes, they moved more product (remember, manufacturing costs are 0), but made more money.

Bonus: With the cost of a movie only $10, you're actually inclined to buy MORE than you originally planned, because hey, what's another $10? However you would definitely be more hesitant to pay $20.

What lower prices would also do is entice people that normally wouldn't (or can't) pay for this stuff actually make the purchase. Most people genuinely want to be honest, but it's really easy for them to justify to themselves pirating rather than buying, with the attitude of if they can't buy everything they want than why buy anything? Think of all of the new customers gained from reasonably priced products.

It's complicated economics well beyond me, but it doesn't take a genius to understand that lower prices = more sales. These industries have never tried this though. They have always placed a premium on their product rather than let the market dictate what to charge. This is an argument that will never end because they will never change. This also means the end user will never change either. Pirating will always be prevalent as long as industries keep this pricing model.]]>Jul 8th 2009 1:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 8th 2009 1:19PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
And the rationalization is ridiculous. DRM is not the reason why people do this.
It' s because $0 is way cheaper than $10, that is all.
I guess for some it's also the feeling that they are "sticking it to the man" on top of the "Zeraw" cost.

There can be only two directions from here: much worse DRM, or a whole new way of thinkign about this.
Apple's solution was to put all the msuci tracks at 99cents, with a passable quality to appeal to the lowest common denomminator.

But videos are nowhere near as practical to handle as Videos, and nowhere near as cheap to produce either.

So I could totally see backtrcaking from the studio, trying to find the most coercive and restrictive ways to enforce their copyrights.

You guys should have seen what the law recently voted in France had (including people being banned from Internet use for years -at the IP level-, if not forever. I don;'t think that part of the law passed, but they're trying), it could be a window on the future.

Million of people breaking the law can't be wrong? Yeah, right.

People just have the wrong attitude toward medias, that they consider should be free.

The day it costs nothing to produce a movie, then it'll be free. Until then, be ready to either face much stronger DRM, and/ or see studios just giving up on risky projects more and more, only to pump out overblown CGI crap that's sure to sell in theatres more and more.]]>Jul 8th 2009 2:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
"People just have the wrong attitude toward medias, that they consider should be free."

50 years ago, if a person couldn't afford to go watch a movie in the theater, then they simply didn't watch it. Now if a person can't afford to watch a movie in the theater (or on DVD), they just download it. There is a sense of entitlement which I find disturbing: "I have a RIGHT to watch/own this movie even if I can't pay for it." I can't understand why people feel this way; who ever said entertainment was a right?

It seems people fail to realize that making movies is a business. And in business, the goal is always to make money. People scream, "LOWER THE PRICE," but if the studios lower the prices, then that lowers their bottom-line. And less income for the studios translates into less movies being made.]]>Jul 8th 2009 8:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
i have downloaded music and movies in the past. i have tried to go legit, but just get frustrated in all the hoops i have to jump through just to get the product i want, all the while knowing that it is just one click away for free in the form i want. ridiculous. just last week i gave Versus $35 for 3 weeks of Tour de France coverage. i get extra stats that the free viewer doesn't, i get commercial free daily stage streams on demand. they provided what i wanted and i paid for it. I even sent them an email saying, "good job satisfying your customers, i hope you get rich. i would pay $30/month for a 720p streaming movie subscription if the selection was good (i already pay for netflix).

its their model, not just freeloaders.]]>Jul 10th 2009 3:46PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/
iT turnned millions of music swapper into paying customers because of
1. Ease of use
2. Ease of price
3. Ease of availablity

i am one of the 85% but it was because there was no outlet that i could use to purchace what I was dlng. iF I can pay for it i will…
iT sad and unamerican…people with money in their pockets and no one to give it to…
]]>Jul 8th 2009 8:20PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Jul 10th 2009 5:17AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/07/85-percent-of-the-14-billion-videos-downloaded-last-year-were-il/Some examples of what I am trying to say:

Digital Media sales Stall in Q1
http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6668382.html

Analysts Sour on Streaming
http://www.homemediamagazine.com/streaming/show-me-money-analysts-sour-streaming-16134



]]>Jul 10th 2009 11:52PM