Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Nice write-up. Although I think it's great that Louie is skipping the middle-man, my worry is that this approach doesn't scale.

Imagine if the top 30 comedy headliners all did this on their own websites. The novelty is gone and the content does not get the adoring press on sites like ours. Having to track down individual websites and go through their registration process is not really hard, but probably too much to ask the lazy invisible hand of self-interested consumers.

When that happens you have to think about aggregating that content, marketing plans, promotion and then ... you're back in the same boat with needing a distribution engine and lots of middle men.

On justifying torrenting, Daring Fireball pulled out a great quote from that Louie AMA on Reddit:

To steal from someone and not feel bad, you either have to be a sociopath or view the act differently. One way is to remove “Someone” from the equation. You’re not stealing from a person. Big companies do a lot to help people view them as less than human. I heard a speech by Noam Chomsky who said that corporations are like super humans. They cannot be hurt like a human can and they never die. They are not susceptible to scrutiny or accountability. This makes them more profitable. If companies want to enjoy these benefits to some degree they have to live with what else comes with being not human. You miss out on compassion, forgiveness, camaraderie, empathy, trust all kinds of shit.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

*quality

Awarding kymbos with one star point for this contribution to VideoSift - declared quality by dag.

See the Humble Bundle deals for a similar "avoid the middle man" approach.

I pirated a bunch before I started earning money, now I only pirate things I could not get through other means really. Games I buy, but TV and Movies are impossible to get here in a reasonable timeframe (+6 months) so I pirate them. If it's a really good movie, I'll see it in a cinema.

When I know the money has a more direct line to the creator of the thing, I tend to be more charitable and buy it. I've also bought old games that I used to play, so I feel better about having played them so much.

I stand by that as long as the pirates provide a better service, I would rather pirate it. If the product is good enough, I'll pay for it too.

It does seem like dag is right -- this only works on this scale for famous people who already have a fanbase.

But the internet works for "the little folk" too -- can't get signed with a big company? See if you can win the internet lottery and then maybe you'll get a deal. Some kind of deal. I'm thinking OK Go as an example.

Piracy is piracy, however you justify it. You can so you do. As I have done, albeit only through jumping on things quick on YouTube before they get shut down. No skills to do anything else.

I think we can underestimate the barriers to online purchasing that normal people perceive. I know people aged in their 30s who love comedy, film and tv but who cannot work out how to torrent let alone buy entertainment products online. They are beholden to the content of their local video shop for entertainment. It seems incredible, but it's true.

OK, my two cents:

* The Louis CK thing: I think the biggest reason for me to pay for it was the $5, and that there wasn't any DRM involved. I hate, hate, hate the idea of paying for something, but then having to worry about how many devices I've loaded it onto or played it on etc. I bought it, I want to play it on my 'stuff'. $5 is bugger all, and as I'd said, I've watched a lot of his stuff online and thought he deserved some of my cash for the enjoyment he's given me. There are plenty of artists who if they give me that low entry cost I'll bite.

* Piracy in General: I do torrent. TV and Movies. TV I do because I figure it'll be on free to air at some stage here in Australia, so I could watch it for free anyway if I could be bothered noting when it's on. OR I could pay exorbitant pay TV prices and get it that way, but I'll be buggered if I'm going to pay a huge sum of money every month for 90% of crap I don't want to watch... and still have the problem of having to work out when it's on to record it etc. So the TV thing is justified that way. Give me a way to 'subscribe' to just the shows I want, on demand... and I'd probably take it.

Movies, movies I absolutely use it as a preview to purchase method. I refuse to buy movies on DVD/Blu-Ray site unseen. I've done it in the past based on glowing reviews from all and sundry, only to find I didn't much care for the flick. Now, I download and watch a movie, and if I like it I honestly do go and buy it. I do go to the cinemas to see movies too as a preview method, but I hardly ever get to do that with 4 kids under 9yrs. And the idea of still going to a DVD rental store is just laughable to me

So that's where I stand on both things. I think there's still a place for the big companies, but they have to lower the prices they think we should be paying for digital delivery of goods. Seriously, $25 fucking dollars for a digital download, what the FUCK are they thinking? Who pays that sort of money for no physical media, and $6 for a rental? Seriously fucked up ideas of what prices should be.

Make the rentals be a $1, make the downloads be $5, and you might have a hope. I don't like paying more than $20 for a Blu Ray, I'm certainly not going to pay more than that for a digital download.

So, yeah, I torrent because I am given no decent other option I'm afraid. But I definitely buy what I like afterwards.

Most of what I would say has already been said by @spoco2 so I'll keep this short:

Companies like EA and Ubisoft have earned a place in my "never, ever pay for their products" list because of their invasive and destructive DRM. To treat a paying customer like a thief is insulting and aggravating.

On the other hand, I have a very strict personal policy of never pirating games from Blizzard, Bethesda and BioWare as these companies have proven that their products are worth my money.

As for other games, if I like them, I buy them. Steam is, IMO, one of the greatest ideas/systems out there when it comes to encouraging the buying of games.

I have no compunctions about torrenting TV shows that I would get for free at home. With a torrent I can watch the content when I want to and don't have to worry about missing it at its regular time-slot.

Movies I treat like a rental: if I like, I will buy. But I agree that a digital download should be a minute fraction of the cost of physical media. I would happily pay a few dollars to download a movie.

With regards to the whole "experiment", I think most non-pirates would be surprised at how many of us would pay if we felt the price was reasonable and worth our dollar. Corporations these days seem to have no clue regarding value for money.

He has a habit of doing that...>> ^Skeeve:

Most of what I would say has already been said by @spoco2...

>> ^kymbos:

I think we can underestimate the barriers to online purchasing that normal people perceive. I know people aged in their 30s who love comedy, film and tv but who cannot work out how to torrent let alone buy entertainment products online. They are beholden to the content of their local video shop for entertainment. It seems incredible, but it's true.


This is very true for a huge portion of population, the older set in particular. My Mother in law looks at our setup, with my media server and XBMC showing all these movies and tv shows in an easy to navigate environment and says "I want that, can I get that?"

And I want to be able to tell her "Yeah, sure"... but there's no way she'll ever be able to get the torrents herself. There's too much, just ingrained, knowledge there about how to spot a fake torrent from a real one, what things NOT to click, what's safe to click etc. Sure she can navigate XBMC when she's at our place, but it's the feeding of that with content that's the problem.

But she wants it, most people want it, they want the ability to watch what show they want when they want. I have a PVR, sure, but I've largely given up trying to record things, as I go to all the effort of setting up the weekly timer only to find part way through the series, when we're finally watching it, they changed the time/night. I know Tivo handles all of that, and that's pretty damn awesome, but it also doesn't help if you find out about a show after it's started airing.

We want to consume your material, huge mega corporations, we're actually willing to pay for it. But with your DRM, your fucking around with show schedules ALL the damn time, your forcing us to watch anti piracy ads and trailers on DVDs/BluRays WE PAID FOR... you just really don't get it. You don't get your market, and for that reason you should fail and die off. Let people who know how to SERVE others step in and give us what we want.

Louis CK just took in over Half a MILLION dollars in 3 days... using grass root style marketing only. Maybe you should take a look at that.

(By 'You', of course I mean the large corps, not you kymbos )

Oh, did I forget to mention? I'm head of Viacom. We're currently talking to Speilberg about filming ET2. And they say we're out of ideas!

Louis C.K. has been hilarious for years, and for years has been making comedy at the expense of big bizz, and had much to do with an old favorite comedy of mine.

As an artist, your job is to convince people that what you do has value, and then give people an opportunity to express (to you) that they agree that what you do has value and that they would like you to continue making your art. At the inception of recorded music, the companies that facilitated this did much to help people to be able to express their sense of value towards recording artist, but over the last few years, those same record companies have done much to get in the way.

What LCK is essentially doing is opening up his cupboard to honesty and respect. He's fully aware that there are lots of people who will not buy his recordings no matter what, but he is fully aware that making things easy for his fans to support him will never bite him in the ass.

I take issue with the assertion that Louis C.K. is not a millionaire.

And even if he's not there yet, he will be. I don't think I'd have any problem stealing from the guy. All this comparing of stealing intellectual material off of the internet raises a red flag for me because even if I did download the show, it's not like I'm going to sell it to someone else to make myself money. That's the thing that I think is morally objectionable.

It sounds silly to say that it's a crime to experience Louis C.K.'s comedy and derive pleasure from that experience. Maybe if I was an artist who actually tried to make a profit I would feel differently. But it's not like Louis C.K.'s comedy is a TV that I can steal, keep around for a while, and then sell to my friend Tom for some crack money. But I do respect the guy. If I had any extra money at all, I'd happily pay the five bucks, but I don't. Come to think of it, if I had extra money, I'd probably be paying for a charter membership first.

I don't know though. You gotta respect a guy who tries something new. Maybe I won't download it. I'll save it until they come out with the Criterion: Ultimate Louis C.K. Experience. That's the kind of thing I'm happy to waste money on.

I paid the $5 for the principle behind his chosen production/distribution method, not for the show.

I thought the show was... merely OK... for Louis CK. I thought his method of production and distribution was OUT OF THIS WORLD !!!!!!!!

>> ^Ryjkyj:

I take issue with the assertion that Louis C.K. is not a millionaire.
And even if he's not there yet, he will be. I don't think I'd have any problem stealing from the guy. All this comparing of stealing intellectual material off of the internet raises a red flag for me because even if I did download the show, it's not like I'm going to sell it to someone else to make myself money. That's the thing that I think is morally objectionable.
It sounds silly to say that it's a crime to experience Louis C.K.'s comedy and derive pleasure from that experience. Maybe if I was an artist who actually tried to make a profit I would feel differently. But it's not like Louis C.K.'s comedy is a TV that I can steal, keep around for a while, and then sell to my friend Tom for some crack money. But I do respect the guy. If I had any extra money at all, I'd happily pay the five bucks, but I don't. Come to think of it, if I had extra money, I'd probably be paying for a charter membership first.
I don't know though. You gotta respect a guy who tries something new. Maybe I won't download it. I'll save it until they come out with the Criterion: Ultimate Louis C.K. Experience. That's the kind of thing I'm happy to waste money on.


Argh... see, I torrent, and I justify myself in ways, but I know I can't actually make it 'right'. You're assertion that stealing is only stealing when it's a physical object is such utter bullshit.

You're essentially saying that his comedy has no value. You're saying that because you can get it for free, easily, then it doesn't feel like stealing to you, and so that means it isn't.

What shit. You apply this to movies and tv shows as well I assume? You're saying that they have no value, even though you like to watch them, you derive pleasure from them in much the way you might derive pleasure from eating nice food... which you would pay for. Or reading a book which... no you'd probably just download the ebook from a torrent site.

Stop trying to pretend that what you're doing is right. You can justify it however you like, but it is a crime, these people spent good fucking money making this stuff (around $200K in Louis' case by his reckoning), and yet you think you're entitled to it for free.

Oh, and I see you're doing the old 'well, he must be rich, so me taking stuff from him won't be doing him any harm' line of reasoning. Which is a popular line, but logically bullshit. How much of a difference your money will make to him shouldn't factor into it. Are the goods on offer worth the price being charged? That's it, no 'Are the goods worth the money & is the person creating it starving'.

He that is among you without sin, let him cast the first stone...

While I may not align my personal self-delusion with Ryjkyj, the thing I find interesting about piracy is that we're all hypocrites

Spoco, to paraphrase you, you’ve said that it’s the Big Corporates ’ fault that you torrent specific products because they insist on controls and limitations, or are too slow. So what? What entitles you to immediate and unfiltered access to whatever you want, whenever you want it? They are artists producing that material, putting their heart and soul into it. Why do you feel entitled to it in a format of your preference?

While I sympathise, I don’t find it a watertight argument. Even those who refuse to torrent on moral grounds may be inhibiting the expansion of art. There’s pretty convincing data around showing that file sharing has led to more musicians producing and being paid for their art than would have occurred otherwise. By file sharing, you are participating in this expansion. By refusing to, you are stunting its growth.

>> ^kymbos:

He that is among you without sin, let him cast the first stone...
While I may not align my personal self-delusion with Ryjkyj, the thing I find interesting about piracy is that we're all hypocrites
Spoco, to paraphrase you, you’ve said that it’s the Big Corporates ’ fault that you torrent specific products because they insist on controls and limitations, or are too slow. So what? What entitles you to immediate and unfiltered access to whatever you want, whenever you want it? They are artists producing that material, putting their heart and soul into it. Why do you feel entitled to it in a format of your preference?
While I sympathise, I don’t find it a watertight argument. Even those who refuse to torrent on moral grounds may be inhibiting the expansion of art. There’s pretty convincing data around showing that file sharing has led to more musicians producing and being paid for their art than would have occurred otherwise. By file sharing, you are participating in this expansion. By refusing to, you are stunting its growth.


Oh, don't get me wrong, I know what I'm doing is wrong, and I know that I should be providing those who make the entertainment money. And as I said, I do with movies... TV not so much, because it's that thing that I don't have much interest in re-watching shows. (Except Deadwood, we bought all of that on DVD, because you can watch that over and over and get things you missed in the beautiful cussing the first time ) So, there, yes I have a problem. A show like Fringe. I think that's an awesome show, looks like it doesn't have much life left in it, could do with the support, but what can I do realistically? I can't add to its ratings at all as I'm not a family with one of the rating boxes (one of my friends was for a while, was fun to intentionally watch 'good' tv to try to boost ratings ), if I bought the show on DVD it'd really be a symbolic gesture on my part where I'd end up with a bunch of DVDs I'll never watch.

Now, if they made the remaining episodes of it available worldwide for a small subscription fee (and hey, open up the back catalogue too so people can catch up), then I'd stop torrenting it and use the legal downloads (assuming they aren't DRM'd all up the butt).

So yes, I know that torrenting isn't 'right', but I try to do the right thing by the work I like. But I have issues with me doing it, and would like to be provided another avenue to do it legally where I can support the creators I like (without having to pay for crap I don't like). @Ryjkyj seems to believe he's actually in the right, and that's what gets my goat. People who seem to think you're only producing something if you can hold it or touch it. That's such utter rubbish.

Good God - you're a Deadwood fan as well? Our similarities are disturbing.

As the great philosopher Janet Jackson once reminded us, this is about Control.

All I'll add to the perceptive comments and breakdowns above is that platform control is still important. People will say that the net offers different options but apparently music acts still want to be signed and promoted. Is there more money that way in the long term? The amount of artists for whom this didn't work out suggests to me there's got to be an alternative.

Alternatives to itunes, Xbox Live, Netflix, every app store out there and who knows what else.

It's strange the more you consider when so much software is open-source, there's crowd-sourcing, all kinds of online collectives etc, that there isn't a alternative distribution hub for artists of all kinds whose work can be digitised. A place where artists and consumers get a fair deal and individuals like Louis CK don't have to set up their own infrastructure.

I don't know, maybe I'm being terribly naive but my gut feeling says there is an opportunity here. Or maybe these things exist and haven't done very well against the prevailing orthodoxy.

>> ^kymbos:

Good God - you're a Deadwood fan as well? Our similarities are disturbing.


Seperated at birth? You decide.

@Deano, you'd think so wouldn't you? Why there can't be a site that people can pay a certain amount purely for the price of the bandwidth to distribute their music/videos (or probably have free options while they're getting popular, payment only kicking in once they have over X downloads in Y days sort of thing). You have your own subsite there, where you sell your wears, money goes straight to you however you want, the site doesn't get involved in that at all... it just provides a place for your band/comedy/short film/feature length film/ whatever to spruik itself and be downloaded/streamed from.

How is that hard? Does this not already exist, and we just not know about it? Sounds like an awesome business model.

For people with content seems obvious.

For the hosting site you'd get money by having ads on the sites of those that are free, and then direct payment from those that have large volume or just don't want ads on their sites.

Damnit internet, get your shit together.

Oh sorry, I thought you were having a conversation, not masturbating.

Now that we all know how great you are for doing the wrong thing even though you're kind-of-sort-of against it, maybe I could just chime in to clarify:

First of all: I can read as well. I know you see a picture from a bad movie when I post. But that doesn't make your regurgitated diatribe about intellectual property rights that can be found anywhere on the internet where there is a dialog about torrents any more intelligent or original than what anyone else has to say.

Second: In no way am I deluded about the concept of intellectual property. I did not ever imply that Louie C.K.'s work has no value. In fact, I called it "stealing" to download it. I also closed my comment by saying that I probably wouldn't download the show.

And I am not under the impression that just because I can't hold something in my hand, that it has no value. All I said was that it's "silly" to think that experiencing someone's comedy can be a crime. The thing about the T.V. is merely to point out the insubstantial nature of the subject. When I go to buy a T.V., I can negotiate sometimes based on whether or not it's a floor model or still in the box. I can't ask a website for a discount if one of Louie's jokes is bad. And with a T.V., I can keep it for a while and then change my mind. Maybe I decide I don't like it and I want to sell it and use the money to pay for part of the next one. Or maybe I've decided to go to Thailand, and I sell the T.V. to my friend Bob for papaya-salad-money. The point is, the two things are different, not that one is worthless and the other isn't.

And you know what the biggest difference is? Someone should not be punished in anywhere near the same way for stealing five bucks worth of Louis C.K.'s material as they should be for breaking into a person's house and stealing their T.V.

Third: Louis C.K. is probably a multimillionaire. I wasn't trying to justify my behavior as much as correcting Kymbos for saying that he wasn't. But now that you mention it: I see that you steal based on DRM and other issues, but (and call me crazy if you want) when I steal, I take into account the financial status of the person I'm stealing from. It might not justify my behavior but it helps me sleep.

Fourth: I steal download things a lot of the time based on whether I think they are fairly priced. I loved the original Conan the Barbarian, mostly for it's kitsch-factor, but I still own the VHS. When the new one came out, I said to myself "that looks like a giant piece of crap taking a crap." So I downloaded it and you know what? I was right. Fuck them. I'm glad I didn't pay twenty-five dollars for ten-cents-worth of soda, two-cents-worth of popcorn and zero-cents-worth of nap time. And all just to grant some Hollywood producer his million dollar reward to play it safe.

One of my favorite things I've ever gotten for Christmas from my wife was the Criterion Collection edition of "Seven Samurai." I love it. It's got this great cover art that looks almost transparent even though it's printed on cardboard. I think it looks so good because it's taken from the original cellulose of the title screen but I don't know. It's also got a great supplemental book, a great CD of special features and anytime I want, I can sit down to three whole hours of good solid movie. I think it cost around sixty-dollars at the time we bought it and it was totally worth it. Meanwhile, somebody gave me the latest "Pirates of the Caribbean" DVD and the ugly yellow text on the menu alone is enough to make me want to burn it for the insult it does to people who paid good money for it.

And you know what else? I doubt that if Louis C.K. were to meet me, that he would hold it against me that I downloaded his show.

I guess I've rambled long enough. I just wanted to make the point that the issues involved with intellectual property are complicated but the concept is something that little children can grasp. So it might not be beneficial to the conversation to write off someone's point that you might disagree with simply because you want to sound righteous. Especially when in the end, you admit that it's all just stealing anyway.

PS: The last book I bought was the hardcover edition of "A Dance With Dragons". I paid the extra money because I find physical copies more satisfying, and I couldn't wait for the paperback.

So...I got an email from him updating us on his experiment. I'm sure you all got it too?

@Ryjkyj Wow, you and I must have wildly different definitions of masturbation, because this is nowhere near as much fun.

Ok, you call it stealing, but you've still decided that you'll be fine with it because he's rich. It's a weird way to work, I would have thought it was better to pay based on weather you think the work merits the money, regardless of how rich you think he is, or how much money some movie studio has. Your supporting of whatever material, no matter how rich the person/entity that creates it is only going to encourage more of what you like. Without that, where's the incentive for them to do more? I get it, you're working on the "well, there's enough people who are paying for X now, so it won't matter if I don't". I get that argument. But again, it doesn't really hold up. It's why I'm bummed about my conundrum about supporting Fringe (and other tv shows) in a way that doesn't involve having to fill my dvd cabinet with box sets of shows I'll never watch again. (And I just checked, and it's ridiculous hard to actually watch it on free to air OR pay tv in Australia, it's jumped around, been postponed, delayed, moved... possibly not run at all any more... urgh... it's impossible to actually watch tv down here)

And I love that you think that you'd still be all chummy with Louis if you told him that you downloaded it without paying. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be ok with it. He'd be "It's $5 fucking bucks man, how could you not pay $5? I made it cheap and stupidly easy for you to buy it... and yet you STILL took it without paying. Man that's low." Then you'd retort with something about having no free money, but if it came out as an expensive Criterion edition DVD then you would buy it... which makes no sense, because that then suggests you do have money but you just didn't want to spend it on his movie download.

Hey, I don't much like paying for download things myself. I hate the ephemeral nature of them. I still buy CDs damnit. Sure I then instantly rip them and listen to them that way, but I like having the physical thing there to show I bought it, and as a backup of my digital copy. Which is why I was pretty happy to get an email from Louis today saying that he put up a DVD cover to print out so that my DVD burn version of his show can look all respectable like... I like that and probably will now burn a copy to DVD and put it in my shelved collection

You justify your downloading your way, I do it mine. Let's leave it at that

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I did get an email from Louie and I thought it was just for me.>> ^rottenseed:

So...I got an email from him updating us on his experiment. I'm sure you all got it too?

I'm masturbating right now.

Discussions about torrenting are so hot!

It was, the email read "Brian Houston" but then he said that he wanted to make sure I saw it too so he CC'd just me.>> ^dag:

I did get an email from Louie and I thought it was just for me.>> ^rottenseed:
So...I got an email from him updating us on his experiment. I'm sure you all got it too?

>> ^spoco2:

You justify your downloading your way, I do it mine. Let's leave it at that


See, this is exactly what I'm talking about. What's the point of having a conversation if you only want to talk to people who agree with you?

It seems to me that you're just drawing the conclusions from what I say that make you feel better about your behavior. Maybe "an orgy of self congratulation" would've been a better metaphor.

It's important to point out here too, that the money issue was just one of many that might affect my decision. A decision which by the way, was never actually made. All I said was that I didn't think that I would have a problem stealing from the guy. And I've already said twice now that I probably wouldn't download it. But since the first thing you harped on didn't work out for you, you'll just move on to the next single issue that you can label as some popular opinion. There are countless issues to bring up about the subject, and I brought up at least a few. But I never said anything like: "I will download this because of this".

And speaking of the money thing, I'm kind of wondering if five dollars is really that cheap. Sure, it's not a lot of money, but I can buy most of Louis C.K.'s DVDs for around fifteen bucks. Let's compare:

For fifteen dollars, I can get a physical copy of something. I can loan it to a friend or put it in a box, unwrapped for years and who knows, it might even be worth more sometime in the future. And even if it's not, I can still sell it if I get tired of it and maybe take a dollar or two off of the next DVD I buy. Shit, I can trade for a sandwich maybe!

I can't loan the digital copy to a friend and it's certainly not going to increase in value(it wouldn't matter anyway, because I can't sell it or trade it). And if anything happens and my computer crashes, the only way I could've prevented it's loss is by... making a digital copy. See the irony there?

Not to mention, a DVD involves hundreds if not thousands of people to make. All the people who produce the raw materials, the marketers, the people who manufacture the final product, the people who ship the final product and let's not forget the people who sell it. All those people take a bite of a measly fifteen bucks. To me, when you compare the two, the guy who sells a digital copy for five bucks and only has to pay the production crew(which the DVD people have to pay as well) and what? a few web techs? That guy's making out like a bandit if you ask me.

I know, maybe I don't make that strong of a case. But at least I know how to have a fucking conversation.

One final word on this. Everybody downloads. Everybody.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/everybody-pirates-riaa-homeland-security-caught-downloading-torrents/65670?tag=nl.e539

I hate when I wander into a conversation, get ridiculed for my beliefs, provide an organized and rational defense of my opinion, and then the other person leaves because they think I'm the one being unreasonable.

I used to think spoco was interesting. But now this conversation will forever stand with me as a shining example of his closed-mindedness and intolerance for the beliefs of others.

Boy was I ever fooled.